D.C. Judges Show Some Skepticism Toward Trump’s Gag Order
How do you restrain the free speech rights of a man who will say anything, has perhaps the largest microphone in the world, and has thousands of devoted followers who will follow his orders?
The question is proving to be a vexing one as the Department of Justice jockeys to defend a blanket gag order against Donald Trump—and the three-judge panel on D.C.’s appellate court showed some skepticism that the current restrictions were appropriate.
The stated purpose of the gag order is to prevent the former president from intimidating witnesses in his 2020 coup case in D.C. But on Monday, the feds found themselves in an impossible spot—laying out free speech limits that bordered on Orwellian while knowing that anything short could give Trump the wiggle room to provoke threats and even violence.