Trump Appeals Judge’s Gag Order Intended to Silence His Criticisms

WASHINGTON -- Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys filed an appeal Tuesday of a gag order that limits his public criticisms of his prosecution in the Jan. 6, 2021 election interference case.?

Trump’s legal team has challenged the gag order on First Amendment free speech grounds, which they say has heightened importance as the former president runs for reelection.

The appeal was filed one day after a federal judge in Washington, D.C., issued a partial gag order against Trump that prohibits him from criticizing the special counsel in the election interference case.

The order says Trump cannot direct any more public criticisms against special counsel Jack Smith, the court staff or potential witnesses. Judge Tanya Chutkan warned that violations of her gag order could result in sanctions against Trump.

She declined the prosecution’s request to expand the gag order to include comments about the Justice Department or Washington.?

“This is not about whether I like the language Mr. Trump uses,” Chutkan said. “This is about language that presents a danger to the administration of justice.”

Chutkan has set Trump’s trial date for March 4 on felony charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding after he allegedly attempted to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Chutkan expressed concern that his condemnations of her, the special counsel and court staff could intimidate witnesses and potential jurors, resulting in a biased trial.

“His presidential candidacy does not give him carte blanche to vilify public servants who are simply doing their jobs,” the judge said.

Trump responded with a post on his social media website Truth Social that said, “WILL APPEAL THE GAG ORDER RULING. WITCH HUNT!”

In some of his Truth Social posts that contributed to the gag order, Trump called Chutkan a “biased, Trump Hating Judge.” He called Smith “deranged” and a “thug.” He also insulted individual members of the special counsel’s team.

Prosecutor’s wrote in their court filing requesting the gag order, “The defendant’s relentless public posts marshaling anger and mistrust in the justice system, the Court, and prosecutors have already influenced the public. For instance, on August 5, 2023, an individual was arrested because she called the Court’s chambers and made racist death threats to the Court that were tied to the Court’s role in presiding over the defendant’s case.”

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

Senator Menendez Prosecution Risks a Diplomatic Fiasco

Foreign policy experts are warning the upcoming criminal trial of U.S. Senator Bob Menendez on corruption charges risks national security interests and exposing government informants to potentially violent reprisal.

An indictment unsealed by the Justice Department last week accuses Menendez, D-NJ., and his wife of acting as unregistered foreign agents for the Egyptian government and of accepting bribes.

They allegedly revealed “sensitive U.S. government information and took other steps that secretly aided the Government of Egypt,” the indictment says.

Another indictment last month accused him of corruption for using his influence to gain hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes from New Jersey businessmen and the Egyptians. He pleaded not guilty in U.S. District Court.

The indictments carefully avoid divulging some sources of evidence, apparently to protect them. They also do not say whether Egyptian officials who oversee international relations with the United States played a role in the alleged bribery scheme.

“How will the Menendez case and the fallout from it affect U.S.-Egyptian relations,” asked John Miller, a former associate deputy director of national intelligence. “As prosecutors prepare for a trial, will any connections the businessman and others tied to the Egyptian government be revealed?”

“These are very sensitive issues that cross over from the Justice Department into the interests of the State Department and the White House,” Miller said. “The lines may have to be drawn very carefully between the prosecution, U.S. diplomatic interests and whether any larger story to come has larger implications for a vital diplomatic relationship.”

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment requires that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted by the witnesses against them.

The Menendez prosecution raises questions about how the court can abide by the Confrontation Clause without a diplomatic disaster.

Menendez denies any wrongdoing. He said in a statement after the second indictment last week, “Piling new charge upon new charge does not make the allegations true. The facts haven’t changed, only a new charge. It is an attempt to wear someone down and I will not succumb to this tactic.”

Menendez has served first in the House of Representatives and later the Senate since 1993. Until he stepped down last month, he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

He helped to oversee billions of dollars in U.S. aid to Egypt.

Menendez married his wife, Nadine Arslanian, in 2020 after meeting her at an IHOP restaurant in New Jersey. They each face as much as 45 years in prison if convicted.

The Justice Department says Menendez and his wife were introduced to high-level Egyptian military officials by Wael Hana, a New Jersey businessman originally from Egypt. Hana is listed as a co-conspirator in the latest indictment.

“At various times between 2018 and 2022, Menendez also conveyed to Egyptian officials … that he would approve or remove holds on foreign military financing and sales of military equipment to Egypt in connection with his leadership role on the [Senate Foreign Relations Committee],” a Justice Department report says. “For example, in or about July 2018, following meetings between Menendez and Egyptian officials … Menendez texted Nadine Menendez that she should tell Hana that Menendez was going to sign off on a multimillion-dollar weapons sale to Egypt.”

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

Supreme Court Endorses New Rule Regulating Sales of Ghost Guns

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered two internet distributors of gun components to comply with a Biden administration regulation intended to control sales of ghost guns.

A federal judge in Texas tried to block the regulation by issuing an injunction Sept. 14 based on Second Amendment gun ownership rights.

The Supreme Court overruled the judge. The regulation requires ghost guns to be regulated in the same way as all others.

Ghost guns refer to firearms that can be purchased online in unassembled components and then assembled at home into working guns. The kits can be purchased by anyone, including minors and felons who otherwise would be prohibited by law.

They lack serial numbers and do not require background checks or registration, which makes them hard for police to trace to an owner.

Recent surveys show gun violence is surging in the United States, some of it from ghost guns.

The Biden administration responded by organizing a White House office on gun violence last month to implement strategies that cut down on the violence.

One strategy the administration has been pushing for more than a year would require the same kind of serialization, background checks and registration now required for guns sold through traditional manufacturers. The strategy was incorporated into a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives rule that took effect in August 2022.

It revised the definition of a firearm under the Gun Control Act to include the kinds of frames and other components sold in ghost gun kits. The sellers are required to be licensed, add serial numbers to major components and to keep records of all sales.

Gun rights groups such as the Second Amendment Foundation Inc., Polymer80 Inc. and Not An LLC, sued to block the rule days after it took effect. They were joined by ghost gun makers Defense Distributed and Blackhawk Manufacturing Group Inc.

In addition to invoking Second Amendment rights, Defense Distributed and Blackhawk argued they would be driven out of business if the ATF rule was enforced against them.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor issued an injunction allowing the online distributors to continue selling ghost guns without complying with the ATF rule. The injunction was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar accused the lower courts of violating a Supreme Court decision in August that allowed the ATF to enforce its new ghost gun restrictions while the issue was pending in lawsuits.

“In doing so, the lower courts openly relied on arguments that this Court had necessarily rejected,” Prelogar wrote in a Supreme Court filing.

“This is the rare application where this Court has already applied the relevant legal standard in the very same case and determined the government should obtain emergency relief,” she wrote. “The Court’s answer should be the same as it was two months ago.”

She also revived Biden administration arguments against ghost guns by writing, “Absent relief from this Court, therefore, untraceable ghost guns will remain widely available to anyone with a computer and a credit card -- no background check required.”

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

D.C. Crime Lab Set to Regain Accreditation for Investigations

The besieged District of Columbia crime lab could regain its accreditation as soon as January, according to a member of the D.C. Council.

The crime lab, also known as the D.C. Department of Forensic Sciences, lost its accreditation from the the American National Standards Institute Accreditation Board in 2021. Its new leaders applied to regain accreditation last month after what they say was a revamping of the way it did its investigations.

The loss of accreditation means the DNA, fingerprint and ballistics analyses performed by its scientists are considered unreliable evidence during criminal prosecutions.

D.C. Councilmember Brianne Nadeau announced a proposed schedule for accreditation after a visit to the lab last week.

Three days of on-site inspections are planned for the lab by ANSI inspectors in December. Approval for accreditation would take another two to six weeks, unless the inspection finds errors.

If the inspectors say the crime lab’s performance is deficient, ANSI could order adjustments before the accreditation is granted.

Nadeau, who has been on the forefront of the D.C. Counci’s crime fighting efforts, said the lab could play an important role in putting a dent in the region’s surging problems with violence.

“Certainty of arrest, prosecution and sentencing prevents crime,” Nadeau said. “This is not the only fix, but it’s a critical piece.”

The crime lab lost its accreditation after auditors hired by the U.S. Attorney’s Office found lax testing procedures that made the evidence it analyzed untrustworthy for purposes of prosecuting defendants.

The audit was prompted by a prosecution in which the lab incorrectly linked cartridge casings to a single gun in two homicides. The conviction of the accused man was overturned when later evidence showed he could not have been the shooter in both cases.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.

D.C. Attorney Charged with Raping Woman During “Brief” Encounter

A Washington, D.C., criminal defense lawyer was due in D.C. Superior Court Friday for a pretrial hearing on charges that he raped a woman.

The unidentified woman says attorney Jonathan Jeffress choked her during an encounter a police report described as “forced, unwanted sexual contact.”

Jeffress said it was a rendezvous with a professional acquaintance he had known for two years. A meeting with her over coffee led to “a brief consensual encounter,” he said in a statement.

“There is no world in which I would ever do what I have been accused of in this case,” Jeffress said. The charges are based on “one person’s uncorroborated, false allegations.”

He said he could prove his innocence with “audio recordings, video surveillance tapes, texts and emails.”

The claimed victim contacted police after the alleged Dec. 21 encounter near her home in Northeast Washington.

She said she was rendered unconscious when Jeffress strangled her. She told police she feared for her life.

Jeffress seeks a bench trial on charges that include first- and third-degree sexual assault. The prosecution opposes a bench trial.

Jeffress, 51, is a partner in the firm KaiserDillon and a former federal public defender. He was one of the firm’s attorneys that helped win a $377.45 million whistleblower judgment in July against government contractor Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. after allegations of procurement fraud.

For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: [email protected] or phone: 202-479-7240.