Trump Smiling as Appeal Court Lifts Gag Order Temporarily

The presiding judge at a New York Appeals Court has temporarily lifted a gag order that had been imposed on Donald Trump and his legal team during his fraud trial.

Earlier, Justice Arthur Engoron, a member of the New York County Supreme Court, had prohibited attorneys from discussing confidential communications that occurred in court during the trial. This encompassed notes exchanged with him by his law clerk, Allison Greenfield.

In reaction to the imposed restraint, the ex-President initiated legal action against Justice Engoron. His legal team contended that his constitutional rights were in jeopardy. Judge David Friedman from the First Department of New York’s Appellate Division supported the claim and temporarily halted the order. 

Consequently, Trump and his legal team are now permitted to publicly discuss communications made by court staff during proceedings. This gag order had been initially enforced on October 3, following Trump’s social media criticism of the Judge’s law clerk.

Trump and his legal team have promptly voiced their apprehensions regarding Justice Engoron, who is overseeing the business fraud case initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James. They have formally requested a mistrial, alleging bias on the part of Engoron against Trump. This perspective has been echoed by New York Representative Elise Stefanik, a Republican, who has criticized Engoron as a “far-left” judge aligned with the Democrats.

According to reports, Allison Greenfield, Justice Engoron’s law clerk, seemed to have surpassed the allowable limit for political donations permitted for a court officer. Notably, Engoron has not taken any apparent action in response to this matter.

The legal proceedings involving Trump and several of his business associates, including two of his sons, revolve around an accusation of falsely representing higher assets to obtain more favorable loans and financial arrangements.

Justice Engoron, a Democrat, tasked with adjudicating the case without a jury, had previously determined, even before the trial commenced, that Mr. Trump’s financial statements were deceitful. As a result, he directed a court-appointed receiver to oversee certain aspects of Trump’s companies. However, an appeals court has temporarily intervened, preventing the implementation of this action.




Most Popular