Donald Trump’s legal team has argued that a proposed protective order designed to prevent him from disclosing evidence in his electoral conspiracy case is “too broad” and should be changed.
In a lawsuit filed Monday, the former president’s attorneys argued that the restrictions proposed by Special Counsel Jack Smith would violate Trump’s First Amendment rights to free speech.
“In a trial over First Amendment rights, the government is attempting to limit First Amendment rights,” Trump’s attorney, John Lauro, wrote in the filing, previewing an argument expected from defense attorneys at the trial.
Prosecutors on Friday asked US District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will preside over the case in Washington, for a protection order after Trump posted, “If you’re after me, I’m after you!” on Truth Social .
Trump’s motion argued that while the proposed order would bar him from releasing government evidence that came to light in the investigative process, his political opponents, including President Joe Biden, had “exploited capital” from the indictment.
Donald Trump’s legal team has argued that a proposed protective order aimed at preventing him from disclosing evidence in his electoral conspiracy case is “exaggerated”.
Trump’s attorneys called the Biden tweet a “thinly veiled reference to his administration’s criminal prosecution of President Trump just hours before indictment.”
Trump’s attorneys called an Aug. 3 tweet by Biden showing Democrats sipping a cup of coffee a “thinly veiled reference to his administration’s prosecution of President Trump just hours before indictment.”
The tweet showed Biden saying, “I like my coffee dark,” while sipping from a mug imprinted with the “Dark Brandon” meme, a tongue-in-cheek portrayal of Biden as a ruthless despot who shoots lasers out of his eyes .
Trump’s filing cited an insider article that speculated that Biden “obviously eclipsed” Trump with a video of him sipping coffee. Biden has repeatedly declined to comment on the allegations Trump is facing.
In a post on his Truth Social website, Trump also lashed out at the proposed restrictions, writing, “I should not be subject to a protective order as it would interfere with my right to freedom of expression.”
“But the deranged Jack Smith and the Department of Injustice should do it because they’re illegally ‘leaking’ everywhere!” He added, citing the special counsel who had filed the case against him.
The debate came as part of the federal criminal case charging Trump with attempting to recoup his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, one of three criminal charges the former president is currently facing.
Prosecutors said a protective order — not uncommon in criminal cases — is particularly important in Trump’s case because of his penchant for using social media.
They have raised concerns that Trump could unlawfully leak confidential case information online, which could have a “detrimental deterrent effect on witnesses.”
In a lawsuit filed Monday, the former president’s attorneys argued that the restrictions proposed by Special Counsel Jack Smith (above) would violate Trump’s rights to free speech
In their request for an order filed on Friday, prosecutors attached a screenshot of this post
In a post on his Truth Social website, Trump was also harsh on the proposed restrictions
Trump’s attorneys argued that the judge should issue a more restricted order prohibiting the public release of only materials deemed “sensitive” — such as grand jury documents — and not all of the evidence presented by the government in the case.
In their request for the order, filed on Friday, prosecutors included a screenshot of a post from Trump’s platform Truth Social from the same day, in which he wrote in capital letters, “If you’re after me, I’m after you!”
Trump’s attorneys said that citing this post as claiming there was a risk Trump might release grand jury information was “perhaps a provocative claim in headline searches, but one that falters on minimal scrutiny.”
The former president’s legal team said his speech was a “general political speech” and had nothing to do with the case.
A Trump spokesman said last week that the “coming after you” post was in response to “dishonest special interest groups and super PACs.”
Trump’s attorneys said in Monday’s filing that the need to protect confidential information about the case “does not require blanket confidentiality for all government-submitted documents.”
The defense motion was in response to Smith’s team’s request Friday for a protective order that would set rules for what Trump and his defense team can do with the evidence turned over by the government as they prepare for trial in the case unsealed last week prepare.
Trump’s attorneys on Saturday asked for three additional days to respond to prosecutors’ request for the protective order, saying they needed more time to discuss. However, Judge Tanya Chutkan immediately denied the request.
The order proposed by prosecutors aims to prevent Trump and his attorneys from disclosing government-provided materials to anyone other than those on his legal team, potential witnesses, the witnesses’ attorneys, or others authorized by the court.
It would impose stricter restrictions on “sensitive material,” which prosecutors said would include grand jury testimony and materials obtained through sealed search warrants.
Prosecutors said they were prepared to turn over a significant amount of evidence to Trump’s legal team, much of it containing sensitive and confidential information.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case, as well as in another federal case brought by Smith alleging illegal hoarding of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla.
He has described all lawsuits against him as an attempt to nullify his 2024 election campaign.
His legal team has indicated they will argue that in 2020 he had relied on the advice of lawyers around him and that Trump had the right to contest an election he felt had been stolen.
Trump pleaded not guilty to four counts last week, including conspiracy to defraud the US and conspiracy to obstruct congressional confirmation of Biden’s election victory.
If convicted, the allegations could result in a long prison sentence, up to 20 years in the most serious cases.
It is the third criminal case this year against the frontrunner in the 2024 Republican presidential primary.
But it is the first case of attempts to blame him for his efforts to stay in power in the chaotic weeks between his election defeat and his supporters’ attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Smith also in June filed charges against Trump on dozens of felonies, alleging that the former president illegally kept confidential records after leaving the White House and obstructed government efforts to get them back.
A recently released new indictment in the case alleges Trump conspiring with Mar-a-Lago employees to try to delete security footage that investigators are looking for.
Judge Bruce Reinhart issued a similar safeguards order in June, barring Trump and his legal team from publicly disclosing evidence given to them by prosecutors without prior authorization.
Prosecutors are asking for another protective order in this case, with more rules for how the defense team handles classified evidence.