NY AG argues for limited gag order in court filing
A lawyer for New York Attorney General Letitia James, in a court filing Wednesday, argued in favor of maintaining the judge's limited gag after an appeals court temporarily lifted the order last week.
The limited gag order, which prohibited Donald Trump and his attorneys from publicly commenting about Judge Arthur Engoron's staff, was issued by the judge last month after Trump posted about the judge's law clerk on social media. Judge David Friedman of the appellate division's First Department stayed the order on Thursday, citing constitutional concerns over Trump's free speech rights.
James' court filing Wednesday alleges that Trump and his lawyers continue to harass Engoron’s law clerk "as part of an improper tactic to disrupt trial and undermine the proceedings."
James said the gag order is a necessary and "exceedingly limited restraint" to protect Engoron’s staff, and Trump’s lawyers failed to prove that attacks on judicial staff during a trial are protected by the First Amendment.
"A speedy denial is necessary to ensure the safety of [the] Supreme Court's staff and the integrity and the orderly administration of the proceedings through the end of the trial," James wrote, describing Trump's attacks as "extraordinary and dangerous."
Arguing that Trump has engaged in a "pattern" of attacking civil servants involved in proceedings against him, James cited his attacks on the former lieutenant governor of Georgia, as well as officials in his federal election interference case. She also mentioned Trump’s renewed attacks against the clerk over the last week since the gag order was lifted, including calling for her prosecution, sharing an article suggesting she engaged in drug use, and describing her as "crooked and highly partisan."
Trump's lawyers have defended such attacks as constitutionally protected speech and argued that Engoron failed to articulate how the attacks present a "clear and present danger" to the clerk.
Trump personally sued Engoron last week using a provision of state law called Article 78, which is generally used to challenge New York government agencies. Trump unsuccessfully attempted to use an Article 78 proceeding on the eve of the trial to delay the proceeding; however, his most recent attempt successfully resulted in a temporary stay of the gag order.
Trump's reply to the filing is due on Nov. 27, after which the First Department will decide whether to fully lift the gag order.