Trump’s Gag Order Violation: What It Means and What’s at Stake
Today in New York Federal Court, Donald Trump stood trial for another day. The issue today, though, had nothing to do with any of the criminal charges he is currently facing.
On trial for alleged “hush money” paid to Stormy Daniels, today it was Trump who was being told to hush. The judge placed a gag order on Trump earlier in the trial, which prohibits Trump from publicly attacking witnesses and jurors, something prosecutors say he’s done at least 10 times since the order went into effect.
Judge Juan Merchan considered whether or not to fine Trump $10,000 – $1,000 for each alleged offense – for attacking witnesses set to testify against him. The judge did not make a ruling today, so before he does, let’s take a look and see what exactly a gag order is, and whether or not Trump violated it by Black’s Law Dictionary defines a gag order as “an order given by a court that restricts any information that is about a case that is pending.”
A gag order can prohibit a defendant in a criminal case from making public comments on the case. The goal is to ensure that the trial remain as fair to both parties as possible. Without a gag order, a particularly loud-mouthed defendant can do everything he can to sway potential witnesses, and to attempt to win the battle outside the courtroom – the court of public opinion.
So when has it been found that a defendant has violated a gag order?
Considering Trump is accused of violating the gag order on social media, let’s see what courts have said about posts and tweets and retweets (or Retruths, as they are called on Trump’s Truth Social). Luckily, there are many cases that deal with the precise topic. In short, yes, a gag order can be violated by posting on social media. For instance, in the 2021 New York Supreme Court case of Barker v. Victorious Life Christian Church, the defendants sought a gag order to prevent the plaintiff from making further contact with the media or posting links to media articles on social media.
Similarly, in the Texas case of In re Lee, a gag order was issued prohibiting relators who were being sued from posting about the case on social media during the lawsuit. In another case, In re W.A., a respondent was held in civil contempt for violating a gag order by posting videos about the case on social media. In the 2014 New Jersey case of Nichols v. Sivilli, a gag order restricted the parties from discussing their divorce on social media and required the removal of all divorce-related information from a blog. In 2020, in ruling on the case of In re Deters, an Ohio lawyer was found in contempt of court for violating a gag order by posting information about the cases on social media.
Therefore, posting about a case or parties involved in a case on social media can be considered a violation of a gag order. There is one key difference between the cases mentioned above and the current discussion on whether or not Trump violated the gag order – the people found guilty of violating it had never been President of the United States of America. So it remains to be seen whether or not the judge will rule that Trump did, in fact, violate the gag order and force Trump to cough up $10,000 as punishment.
The judge appeared deeply unconvinced by arguments from Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche. “Mr Blanche, you’re losing all credibility, I have to tell you right now,” the judge said at one point, after Trump’s lawyers swore that the former president was doing everything he could to avoid violating the gag order. He repeated, “You’re losing all credibility with the court.” As for Trump, he left his gag order violation hearing and immediately took to social media. He posted on Truth Social immediately after the hearing to vent about the judge. The judge is not covered by the order, so Trump has more leeway when bashing him online. If he continues to target witnesses, though, he may face more than a fine – prosecutors have hinted at potentially requesting Trump be jailed for his attempts to interfere with the trial.