Monday’s court filing from Donald Trump’s lawyers didn't directly address the claims of potential witness intimidation by their client.SCOTT MORGAN/Reuters
Donald Trump’s lawyers told a federal judge on Monday that strictly limiting the public release of evidence ahead of his 2020 election trial would violate his free speech rights, after prosecutors warned the former U.S. president could use that information to intimidate witnesses.
Federal prosecutors had sought a protective order against the former U.S. president, saying that Mr. Trump could improperly disclose confidential evidence received from prosecutors without the order.
In a 29-page filing to the U.S. District Court in Washington, Mr. Trump’s attorneys on Monday did not directly address the assertion of potential witness intimidation.
They said they recognized some documents should be shielded from the public, such as materials from a grand jury investigation that led to last week’s indictment accusing Mr. Trump of orchestrating a plot to overturn his 2020 election loss.
“However, the need to protect that information does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government,” they wrote in the court papers filed on Monday.
“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Mr. Trump’s attorneys said, referring to the right of free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
A spokesperson for U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office did not immediately return a request for comment. Protective orders are typically issued in criminal cases.
Mr. Trump on Thursday pleaded not guilty to federal charges that he conspired to try to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democratic President Joe Biden. It was the third criminal case brought against Mr. Trump so far this year.
At his arraignment on Thursday, Mr. Trump swore to not intimidate witnesses or communicate with them about the case without legal counsel present.
Prosecutors on Friday, in their request for a protective order from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, pointed to a post from Mr. Trump on his Truth Social site that said, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!”
Mr. Smith’s office said the post could suggest that Mr. Trump, front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, might try to intimidate witnesses.
Under a process known as discovery, prosecutors must provide defendants with the evidence against them so they can prepare a defence. Prosecutors in their Friday filing said they are prepared to provide Mr. Trump with a “substantial amount” of evidence once a protective order is issued.
Justice Chutkan has said she may hold a hearing on the matter.
A Trump spokesperson on Saturday denied that the Friday post was related to the trial, saying instead that Mr. Trump was attacking people dubbed “Republicans in Name Only” or RINOs.
But Mr. Trump’s social media posts attacking both the case and Justice Chutkan have escalated since prosecutors’ Friday court filing. He has said he will seek Justice Chutkan’s recusal in the case, although his lawyers have yet to officially make such a request.
Justice Chutkan has previously ruled against Mr. Trump in a civil lawsuit seeking to block White House records from a congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters.
She also has strongly spoken out against the Capitol attack in criminal cases stemming from the riots. Prior court rulings are not enough to require a federal judge to step aside from a case.
Mr. Trump’s lawyer John Lauro has said he will seek to transfer the 2020 election case from Washington, D.C., to West Virginia. While criminal cases are sometimes tried in different locations than where they are brought in order to sit an impartial jury, others charged in the Capitol siege have failed in trying to have their criminal cases transferred out of the Washington federal trial court.