A New York judge has delivered a sharp rebuke to Donald Trump's legal defence, raising the prospect of sanctions for a potential breach of a strict gag order in the former president's criminal hush money case.
The controversy erupted after Trump's attorneys filed a legal motion that failed to properly redact the names of potential witnesses. This filing, which argued for the termination of the gag order, was publicly accessible for a day before being removed from the court's electronic system.
Judge's Stern Warning
Justice Juan Merchan did not mince words in his response. In a formal order, he demanded a full explanation from the defence team, questioning why they had not sought permission to file the document under seal given its sensitive content.
"The Court directs Defendant to file a memorandum of law... explaining why the Motion should not be held in abeyance or denied based on the false and misleading assertions in the Motion and the improper service of the Motion on the Court and the District Attorney," Justice Merchan stated.
The Core of the Gag Order
The existing order, which remains in effect, strictly prohibits Trump from making public statements about:
- Known or anticipated witnesses in the proceedings
- Prosecuting attorneys, court staff, and their families
- Any potential jurors
This measure was implemented to prevent intimidation and protect the integrity of the judicial process.
Political Allies and Witnesses
The court filing in question named several high-profile figures, including former Trump allies-turned-witnesses Michael Cohen and Hope Hicks. It also mentioned adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, both central to the hush money allegations.
Trump's legal team had argued the gag order should be lifted following his presidential election victory, claiming it stifled his political speech. However, prosecutors maintain the restrictions remain necessary to ensure a fair trial.
The judge has given Trump's lawyers until June 13th to respond to the allegations of improper conduct in this latest legal manoeuvre.
