Trump must pay the first fine by early November — 10 days from when it was issued — and he has 30 days to pay the second.
The civil case stems from a lawsuit brought by the New York attorney general, Letitia James, who accused Trump of fraudulently inflating his net worth to receive better treatment from banks and insurers.
Trump is also contending with four criminal indictments — and a second gag order. The federal judge overseeing a criminal case in Washington, where Trump is accused of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election, restricted his ability to target witnesses in the matter, prosecutors or her own court staff.
The judge, Tanya Chutkan, put the order on hold for a week while Trump appeals it. For now, Trump has not appealed Engoron’s order, though a lawyer for Trump, Christopher Kise, said he was evaluating a potential appeal. “We have significant concerns about the constitutionality of limiting President Trump’s right to comment on what he observes in the courtroom,” Kise said.
Why are there gag orders?
Engoron imposed his order October 3, the second day of the trial, after the former president attacked the law clerk, Allison Greenfield, on social media. Trump posted a picture of her with Senator Chuck Schumer, accusing her of partisanship and saying she was “running this case against me.”
Shortly thereafter, the judge banned him from commenting, posting or emailing about members of his staff.
Although the order is limited, Trump has violated it twice in less than a week. The first violation was inadvertent: A version of his social media post remained on Trump’s campaign website for weeks. When Engoron discovered that it was still up, he fined the former president.
On Wednesday, Trump went further: “This judge is a very partisan judge,” he told reporters. “With a person who’s very partisan sitting alongside of him — perhaps even much more partisan than he is.”
Chutkan issued her gag order this month after prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, complained about Trump’s “near daily” social media attacks against their boss, whom Trump has repeatedly called “deranged.” The former president also attacked several people who might appear as witnesses, including Gen. Mark Milley, who is the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and former Vice President Mike Pence.
How much money would it take for Trump to care?
More than US$15,000.
Although Trump is fond of bragging about his wealth, he is loath to spend money. If history is a guide, Trump would most likely rein in his comments about Greenfield if he were to rack up tens of thousands of dollars in fines.
When Engoron held Trump in contempt last year for failing to fully cooperate with a subpoena from James, Trump complied after the judge imposed a US$110,000 fine.
When Engoron imposed the gag order, Trump quickly backed down and removed the offending post. Even his remarks Wednesday were a toned-down version of earlier attacks.
What other powers do the judges have?
Judges could more forcefully rebuke Trump and hold him in contempt. If all else fails, the nuclear option — jail — would most likely get the job done.
But that would prompt an uproar from Trump’s supporters and cause a logistical nightmare for the court system. Engoron is likely to exhaust every other punishment before jailing Trump.
On Wednesday, prosecutors under Smith appeared to lay groundwork for a judge to act against him. They asked Chutkan to reconsider the lenient conditions of Trump’s release from custody after his indictment, suggesting that they might return with a request for punishment.
Chutkan has another card to play: expediting Trump’s trial.
Trump is seeking to delay it until well after the 2024 election. Chutkan has scheduled it for March but has said that if Trump continues to threaten people involved, she might move faster to preserve the proceeding’s integrity.
What about free speech?
Trump’s lawyers have insisted that the orders violate his rights — particularly given that he is making a third run for the White House. John Lauro, who represents him in the federal election interference case, wrote that Chutkan’s order “violates virtually every fundamental principle of our First Amendment jurisprudence.”
“No court in American history has imposed a gag order on a criminal defendant who is campaigning for public office — least of all, on the leading candidate for president of the United States,” he wrote.
Chutkan and Engoron have both said that Trump’s rights as a candidate must be weighed against the danger he poses to those he attacks.
Chutkan noted that the First Amendment did not permit Trump “to launch a pretrial smear campaign” against people involved in the case, adding, “No other defendant would be allowed to do so.”
Engoron struck a similar note in court Thursday.
“Anyone can run for president, but I am going to protect my staff,” he said. “I don’t think that it is impinging on someone’s First Amendment rights to protect my staff.”
But in a so-called friend-of-the-court brief, the American Civil Liberties Union supported Trump, calling the gag order in his federal case “impermissibly broad” and “impermissibly vague.”
“Donald Trump has said many things. Much that he has said has been patently false and has caused great harm to countless individuals, as well as to the republic itself,” the ACLU wrote. “But Trump retains a First Amendment right to speak, and the rest of us retain a right to hear what he has to say.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Written by: Jonah E. Bromwich, Ben Protess and Alan Feuer
©2023 THE NEW YORK TIMES
