Former President Donald Trump's gag order in the New York civil fraud case should not have been lifted, argued Pace University law professor Bennett Gershman in an interview with Salon released on Monday — and furthermore, he is "confident" the appellate judge that ordered the pause on it "greatly regrets" that decision in light of subsequent events.
The order, which is now on hold and still being litigated, prohibited Trump from attacking certain court officers, including Allison Greenfield, the law clerk of Judge Arthur Engoron, who has been a persistent target of the former president's wrath.
Prior to the order being paused, Trump was fined twice for violating it.
“The main legal challenge to gag orders in general is that they infringe on the First Amendment right to free speech,” Gershman said. “Courts have to balance the danger to the personal safety of the persons being targeted by Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric as well as the damage to the integrity of judicial proceedings with the right to speak.”
All that being said, Gershman continued, Trump's behavior while the order has been out of effect is more than enough to show that it was necessary.
ALSO READ: Now we know how Hitler did it
“The record of phone calls, voicemails, and emails … include death threats, insinuations into the personal lives of the judge and his clerk, and include antisemitic remarks,” said Gershman. “I’m confident that the appellate judge who vacated the gag order greatly regrets his decision.”
The Trump trial hinges on allegations from New York Attorney General Letitia James that the former president and his two adult sons systematically lied about the value of their assets to get more favorable loan and tax arrangements. Engoron has already ruled on the merits in favor of James in a summary judgment, leaving the trial primarily about assessing damages.
James is seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and the dissolution of the Trump Organization.
All of this comes as a second gag order, issued by D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in the federal election interference case, is also on hold and being appealed.
