Bragg Seeks to Muffle, But Not Gag, Trump From Discussing Evidence
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office is seeking to bar former President Donald Trump from publicly distributing evidence submitted by prosecutors to his attorneys during the discovery phase of New York’s criminal case against him. While the request from Bragg’s office is not an explicit gag order, it lays bare prosecutors’ concerns that Trump could exploit materials made available to him for his own political advancement.
According to a report from Bloomberg, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Catherine McCaw wrote in a Tuesday filing that “the risk that this defendant will use the covered materials inappropriately is substantial,” given that Trump “has a long history of discussing his legal matters publicly — including by targeting witnesses, jurors, investigators, prosecutors, and judges with harassing, embarrassing, and threatening statements on social media and in other public forums — and he has already done so in this case.”
The request also seeks to limit Trump’s direct access to evidence, and prohibit him from viewing materials without having his attorneys present.
Trump was indicted last month on 34 felony charges related to the former president’s hush-money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. Trump has publicly lambasted Bragg, Judge Juan Manuel Merchan, and anyone he perceives as helping the District Attorney’s case.
As previously reported by Rolling Stone, Trump’s attorneys and allies have pleaded with him to cease his public feuding with prosecutors and Judge Merchan. Advisors worried that should the former president be charged, his calls for protests and suggestions of “death and destruction” could be viewed as threats of violence by those overseeing the case.
Judge Merchan has already declined to institute an outright gag order against Trump, but cautioned him to refrain from making “comments that have potential to incite violence, create civil unrest [or] jeopardize the state or well-being of any individuals,” or he would reconsider his decision.
Despite the warning from the judge, Trump has continued his social media ranting about the case. Leaving New York after his arraignment, Trump posted on Truth Social that “virtually every legal pundit has said that there is no case here. There was nothing done illegally!”
Ultimately, restricting Trump’s ability to comment on the case comes down to Merchan’s assessment of what risk the former president’s reach presents to the integrity of the case. If he rules in Bragg’s favor, Trump would be under the order’s thumb for a long time — as the case is not expected to move forward until early next year.