Are gag orders constitutional?

[BasicHumanUnit]

The abuse of power by Democrats is off the scale. There should be no such things as obvious threats and intimidation or going public with information that would jeopardize the integrity of the facts of the case BUT calling out a judge and his stooges as being the biased fucks that they are is a first amendment right, even if some whackos go too far and threaten the judges and others, as long as Trump doesn't specifically request violence be done. Democrats are just fine with stirring the pot calling for people to fight like hell, etc. and even attacking Supreme Court justices to the point they get death threats.

Now why didn't the FFs think of a way to stop tyrants from making us all peasants?
Do we still have a Constitution? Not really.

Doing nothing has consequences.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Where does the constitution give the government the power to do that? To limit our rights when it feels like it?

Should someone be able to sacrifice babies as an act of following their religion, or are you ok with the Govt limiting their rights in that instance?

 

[Votto]

Impossible for either to silence Trump.



If that were true you might have a point. The POTUS has 100s of ways to communicate with the voters.

So long as the political opposition controls the news outlets that reach the majority of voters, your assertion is false.

For example, after the last election about 20% of voters said they would not have voted for Biden had they known about the Hunter Biden scandal which was censored from major sources of social media, a story that was later proven to be legit as they censored it for being fake news.

Poll: 17% of Biden Voters Would Have Abandoned Him if They Knew About Stories the Media Censored

A new poll finds that 17 percent of Biden voters would have voted differently if they’d been given fair media coverage of both candidates.

www.westernjournal.com

Without free access to an unbiased press, democracy does not really exist.

In other words, democracy does not really exist.

 

[SeaMajor7]

All this harassment is setting an EVIL precedent that NO-ONE is going to like in the future....

 

[Votto]

Should someone be able to sacrifice babies as an act of following their religion, or are you ok with the Govt limiting their rights in that instance?

It's only OK of Planned Parenthood murders babies or their pals with Hamas

Only then is murdering babies equivalent to your Left wing social justice.

You really should write another Constitution. No one would even make a peep about it since you Left wing scum own the medial.

 

[WorldWatcher]

link

Google

Search the world's information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you're looking for.

www.google.com

WW

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You mother fuckers are illiterate

Do you disagree with slander and libel laws? They go against the 1st.

Do you think the freedom to practice your religion should have no limitations?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

You mother fuckers are illiterate

Or,

It's just that they are overjoyed as they watch America fall and become a 3rd world communist hell hole.
Their "Utopia" is a place where the iron fisted rule of government over rides ALL human rights and liberties.

So, of course they are advocates of limiting (actually crushing) free speech.

 

[Pete7469]

Twitter and social media silenced Trump before the gag order and that was Ok as well

Isn't that right. A sitting President of the United States unable to communicate with voters except for only what the media wanted to tell them about Trump

This is your utopia.

1984 needed a Forward Chapter specifically to instruct inane bed wetters that the book was a How NOT TOO Establish a Socialist Government. Every leftist government on earth has been a hellish dystopia, and they never seem to learn a lesson. They gradually get worse in many cases, or like the euroweenies and russians, abandon the ideas as stupid, BECAUSE THEY ARE.

 

[Votto]

The gag orders issued thus far have been specifically tailored to prevent Don from making threats against members of the court. Not generically "talking about the government." The judges who have issued them have noted all the areas of speech that remain protected by the 1st A. But what you need to recognize is anyone who has been indicted immediately forfeits certain rights. So their speech may be under greater restriction than an ordinary citizen. So yes, they are constitutional.

You have to have a gag order to deal with people threatening others? No you don't. You file charges as the threats come idiot.

How about a gag order for Chuck U Schumer to prevent him from threatening SCOTUS?

Schumer Criticized for Allegedly Threatening Supreme Court Justices

The Senate Minority Leader received strong criticism after he called out Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch over their views on abortion.

www.newsweek.com

Then when one of the Left wing loons showed up at the house of Kav to carry out the Schumer assassination order, no one in the DNC condemned the attempted assassination. It took Biden a full week to even mention it and finally condemn it but no one else in the DNC seemed to care.

But what do you expect from a party that refuses to condemn blatant acts of terrorism? They are Nazis.

 

[Votto]

1984 needed a Forward Chapter specifically to instruct inane bed wetters that the book was a How NOT TOO Establish a Socialist Government. Every leftist government on earth has been a hellish dystopia, and they never seem to learn a lesson. They gradually get worse in many cases, or like the euroweenies and russians, abandon the ideas as stupid, BECAUSE THEY ARE.

The ideology of Marxism murdere hundreds of millions last century, more than any other ideology, including Nazism.

However, today Nazism is viewed universally as evil while Marxism is seen as being cool, like BLM coming out as Marxists.

That is the power of controlling both the media and academia.

Next up for extermination is the Zionist state, and the media and academia will be having people marching in the streets in support as they do it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Yes because they are a condition of pre-trial release to which you agree.

If not, don't take pre-trial release and sit in jail awaiting trial.

WW

Aka GOVERNMENT ENDORSED EXTORTION

Also unconstitutional as hell

 

[berg80]

For much of this week, after a federal judge temporarily froze the gag order she imposed on him, former President Donald J. Trump has acted like a mischievous latchkey kid, making the most of his unsupervised stint.

At least three times in the past three days, he has attacked Jack Smith, the special counsel leading his federal prosecutions, as “deranged.” Twice, he has weighed in about testimony attributed to his former chief of staff Mark Meadows, who could be a witness in the federal case accusing him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election.

Each of Mr. Trump’s comments appeared to violate the gag order put in place less than two weeks ago to limit his ability to intimidate witnesses in the case, assail prosecutors or otherwise disrupt the proceeding. And after the former president was fined $10,000 on Wednesday for flouting a similar directive imposed on him by the judge presiding over a civil trial he is facing in New York, federal prosecutors asked that he face consequences for his remarks about the election interference case as well.

On Friday, the judge who imposed the federal order, Tanya S. Chutkan, put it on hold for a week to allow the special counsel’s office and lawyers for Mr. Trump to file more papers about whether she should set it aside for an even longer period as an appeals court considers its merits.

But in the first round of those additional papers, prosecutors said on Wednesday that the order should be kept in place as the appeals court considers Mr. Trump’s request. They also said the lenient way in which Mr. Trump was released from custody after his indictment should be reconsidered for a simple reason: He has kept on violating the gag order’s provisions.

Federal Prosecutors Push to Reinstate Gag Order on Trump

In court filings, the special counsel’s office said the gag order was needed to keep the former president from making “harmful and prejudicial attacks” on people in the federal election case.

www.nytimes.com

There are no constitutional grounds on which the gag orders issued for Trump are prevented. You wouldn't even be asking the question if Don wasn't involved so don't pretend otherwise.

 

[TNHarley]

Should someone be able to sacrifice babies as an act of following their religion, or are you ok with the Govt limiting their rights in that instance?

Killing babies? Seriously? Thats your analogy?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There are already laws to prevent jury threats/tampering. There are also laws to protect court officials.

Gag orders are CLEARLY a violation of the first amendment.

 

[TNHarley]

Google

Search the world's information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you're looking for.

www.google.com

WW

about what i figured.im sure USMB appreciates the wasted bandwidth

 

[candycorn]

Are gag orders constitutional?​

yes

 

[Votto]

For much of this week, after a federal judge temporarily froze the gag order she imposed on him, former President Donald J. Trump has acted like a mischievous latchkey kid, making the most of his unsupervised stint.

At least three times in the past three days, he has attacked Jack Smith, the special counsel leading his federal prosecutions, as “deranged.” Twice, he has weighed in about testimony attributed to his former chief of staff Mark Meadows, who could be a witness in the federal case accusing him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 election.

Each of Mr. Trump’s comments appeared to violate the gag order put in place less than two weeks ago to limit his ability to intimidate witnesses in the case, assail prosecutors or otherwise disrupt the proceeding. And after the former president was fined $10,000 on Wednesday for flouting a similar directive imposed on him by the judge presiding over a civil trial he is facing in New York, federal prosecutors asked that he face consequences for his remarks about the election interference case as well.

On Friday, the judge who imposed the federal order, Tanya S. Chutkan, put it on hold for a week to allow the special counsel’s office and lawyers for Mr. Trump to file more papers about whether she should set it aside for an even longer period as an appeals court considers its merits.

But in the first round of those additional papers, prosecutors said on Wednesday that the order should be kept in place as the appeals court considers Mr. Trump’s request. They also said the lenient way in which Mr. Trump was released from custody after his indictment should be reconsidered for a simple reason: He has kept on violating the gag order’s provisions.

Federal Prosecutors Push to Reinstate Gag Order on Trump

In court filings, the special counsel’s office said the gag order was needed to keep the former president from making “harmful and prejudicial attacks” on people in the federal election case.

www.nytimes.com

There are no constitutional grounds on which the gag orders issued for Trump are prevented. You wouldn't even be asking the question if Don wasn't involved so don't pretend otherwise.

Keeping Trump from talking I think is a way to have Trump win the GOP nomination. Literally, preventing Trump from talking is the best medicine for increased support for him as the country continues to spiral the drain.

So why would they do that? They will just let him win the nomination being silenced, and then show him to be guilty of something in a court of law to nix his election chances. Whether the guilty finding is legit or not will not matter.

If Joe Biden ran against anyone else, he would lose easily.

As Trump once said, "If I lose to Biden, I will have lost to the worst Presidential candidate in US history"

Which is why the Left wants Trump to run again.

Silencing Trump is manipulating an election, but then, that is all democrats are interested in doing since they will have to do that in order to win.

 

[Independent thinker]

Now why didn't the FFs think of a way to stop tyrants from making us all peasants?
Do we still have a Constitution? Not really.

Doing nothing has consequences.

Yes, we need to stand up to Democrat's flagrant abuse of power and taking away people's rights.

 

[TNHarley]

yes

What an extensive vocabulary!