A Washington federal court judge has blocked former President Donald Trump from disclosing potential trial evidence shared with his attorneys in an upcoming election fraud case after prosecutors cited his social media history.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan follows a four-page filing on Friday from Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith requesting a strict order to silence Trump from sharing information culled from discovery documents or evidence.
He wrote: “If the defendant were to begin to make public publications using the details — or, for example, grand jury transcripts — obtained on discovery here, they might have a chilling effect on the witnesses or adversely affect the just administration of justice in this Case”, Haddad.
On Friday, Trump made this all-caps post to the Truth Social: “If you go after me, I’ll come after you!”
Earlier in the week, the attorney general mentioned by name in another post: “I hear that deranged Jack Smith, in order to interfere in the 2024 presidential election, will roll out yet another bogus indictment of your favorite president.”
The court papers also cited previous social media outbursts by Trump “regarding witnesses, judges, attorneys, and others associated with legal matters pending against him.”
The defendant pleaded not guilty Thursday in the alleged sweeping conspiracy to overturn the results of the 2020 election and obstruct a peaceful transition to President Joe Biden’s White House in 2021. Unlike a full gag order, this would only limit what Trump and his legal team could share publicly. spp.
The judge said her ruling was intended “to expedite the flow of discovery material between the parties and to provide adequate protection for certain information that the United States intends to provide to the defendant.”
The order, Chutkan added, does not affect publicly available records regardless of government documents or any records “obtained by the defendant or defense counsel by independent means, unrelated to the discovery process.”
Trump was given until 5 p.m. Monday to respond to the judge’s order, with court filings asking the defendant to include “a redacted version of this order of protection with any redline modifications” if he disagrees with the government’s plan.
Smith said Friday’s protection order proposal from Trump’s attorneys “did not protect, in the government’s judgment, many categories of sensitive materials, including grand jury materials and sealed search affidavits.”
The special counsel said prosecutors had previously been prevented from sharing documents with Trump’s defense team in a timely manner due to their inability to reach an agreement with his attorney.
“The government endeavors to provide the defendant with disclosure as soon as possible, including a particular discovery to which the defendant is not entitled at this time,” he wrote in the lawsuit.
