Defense attorney Alina Habba, speaking to reporters outside court, said that an appellate judge's decision to temporarily stay Judge Engoron's limited gag order on Donald Trump would allow the defense team to continue raising issues with the conduct of Engoron's clerk.

Habba also said she saw no reason to advise Trump to refrain from attacking the clerk now that the gag order has been stayed -- despite Judge Engoron's concerns about his staff facing threats.

"There is not a day that I don't get a threat. It's just part of the game," Habba said. "If I put something out on social media, and I get a threat for it, which has happened to me every single day, I don't get to cry."

"Ms. James is continuing to disparage my client," Habba said, referring to New York Attorney General Letitia James, who filed the lawsuit against Trump. "And they were grasping at straws for a reason to say that the president should be gagged. There was no reason."

James did not ask for the gag order, which was issued by Judge Engoron last month out of concern for the safety of his staff after Trump made a false post about his clerk on social media.

New York Attorney General Letitia James and representatives for Judge Arthur Engoron have until Wednesday to file a response to the appellate judge's stay of the limited gag order imposed last month on Donald Trump by Engoron, according to the appellate judge's order.

Trump's reply is then due on Nov. 27 before the appellate court decides whether to fully lift the gag order. The civil fraud trial is expected to wrap up in mid-December.

Engoron's "gag orders entered during the non-jury trial in the underlying proceeding are unconstitutional, and sanctions imposed there under are in violation of the Judiciary Law and Rules of this court," Trump's attorneys said in arguing for the order to be lifted.

Oral arguments about the gag order were presented at a separate courthouse from the courtroom where Trump's civil trial is taking place. Engoron, who is hearing testimony from an expert witness, has not commented on the decision.

A New York appeals court has temporarily lifted the limited gag order imposed on Donald Trump by Judge Arthur Engoron.

Judge David Friedman of the appellate division's first department ruled from the bench after a brief oral argument.

The judge stayed the limited gag order, citing constitutional concerns over Trump's free speech rights.

"Considering the constitutional and statutory rights at issue, an interim stay is granted," Judge Friedman said in a handwritten order.

The gag order was imposed by the Engoron last month after Trump posted about the judge's law clerk on social media.

Attorneys for Donald Trump have filed an emergency application for a stay of the limited gag order issued by last month Judge Engoron, asking that an appeals court annul and vacate the gag order and fines imposed against him.

Trump has been fined on two occasions, for a total of $15,000, after making statements referencing the judge's clerk, and the judge recently extended the gag order to apply to lawyers in the case.

Trump's lawyers argue that the gag order is an unconstitutional violation of Trump's freedom of speech, which they say Engoron has used as a "unfettered license to inflict public punishments on a defendant for the defendant's out-of-court statements."

"As applied to President Trump, it also prevents a presidential candidate from commenting on the public conduct and possible ethical violations of a critical member of Justice Engoron's chambers," Trump's lawyers wrote.

Engoron has said the gag order is meant to protect his staff from violence, noting that his chambers has received hundreds of threatening phone calls, messages, and packages over the course of the trial. While Trump's lawyers described Engoron's desire to protect his staff as "understandable," they argue the gag order is too broad a "curtailment of plainly protected speech in a trial playing out on a national and international stage."

An attorney for the New York attorney general responded to the filing by describing the gag order as the least restrictive means available to protect Engoron's staff.

"The First Amendment does not prohibit courts from restricting speech that threatens the safety of the court's staff or frustrates the orderly progression of a trial," the attorney general responded in a letter to the appeals court.

Defense attorney Chris Kise requested that Judge Engoron again reconsider his decision to fine Donald Trump $10,000 for violating the case's limited gag order yesterday, offering a broader criticism of the gag order based on First Amendment grounds.

"This is open, public, and the defendant has a First Amendment right to comment on what he sees and perceives as a potential source of bias," Kise said.

Like yesterday, Kise maintained that Trump was referring to Michael Cohen, rather than the judge's law clerk, during his hallway statement in which he said the judge has a "person who is very partisan sitting alongside of him." Trump attested to this on the stand yesterday, though Engoron found that Trump was "not credible."

"The review of the statement does not support the sanction," Kise said.

Even if Trump was referring to the clerk, Kise made a broader argument that the gag order itself was "constitutionally infirm," considering Trump is the "leading candidate" for the presidency.

"I don't think that the order survives constitutional scrutiny," Kise said.

State attorney Andrew Amer argued in support of the gag order, which he said was narrowly limited to withstand constitutional scrutiny.

"A federal judge in D.C. has issued a similar order to protect herself," Amer added, referring to a ruling in Trump's election interference case.

Judge Engoron said he would reconsider the fine but stood by his gag order.