Are gag orders constitutional?

[jc456]

Nope! You and your orange god need to learn this lesson.

Take all the time you need.

There you go . That says everything for everyone

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There you go . That says everything for everyone

I really wasn't counting on you to puzzle out the correct answer.

 

[jc456]

I really wasn't counting on you to puzzle out the correct answer.

Cause there isn’t one, you proved it

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Cause there isn’t one, you proved it

You might be the dumbest poster I have ever come across.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Nope! You and your orange god need to learn this lesson.

Take all the time you need.

Learn a lesson!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Learn a lesson!

So, any luck? It's a pretty easy question, for an educated adult.

 

[WinterBorn]

Message after message out on media infecting the jury pool in the country! This makes the gag order illegal.

To ensure a guilty verdict

No, it does not make a gag order illegal. The media is responsible for what they put out.

 

[WinterBorn]

I posted how in my Idaho 4 video. Feel free to watch

Ok, I watched it. 22 minutes I will never get back.

Yes, the media may have screwed up the jury pool. But a judge does not have the power to silence the media outside of the courtroom.

This video did not prove anything except that the guy they convicted was possibly screwed over.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If we approach the question from the perspective of observing "facts of the current state of affairs", the answer is:

Yes, it is constitutional. The Supreme Court said so.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Glass half full / glass half empty. Is a restricted or limited right, still a right?

Yes.

No right is ‘absolute’ – all of our rights are subject to limitations and restrictions consistent with the Constitution.

 

[Care4all]

But the prosecution is victim intimidation of the defendant

The prosecution/(prosecutor) is under a gag order as well.....they can't chit chat about the case details or intimidate witnesses or taint a jury pool either....it's part of normal procedure and expectation of all involved in the case.

 

[jc456]

No, it does not make a gag order illegal. The media is responsible for what they put out.

They put out what they got from the prosecution. Where’s the gag for them?

 

[jc456]

The prosecution/(prosecutor) is under a gag order as well.....they can't chit chat about the case details or intimidate witnesses or taint a jury pool either....it's part of normal procedure and expectation of all involved in the case.

No they aren’t. Their material was already out in the news.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The theater is a circumstance and not a speech issue. If you are sure the theater is completely empty, you may yell Fire to your hearts content

Government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on speech provided those limits and restrictions are content neutral and are narrowly tailored in their scope.

Government can prohibit you from holding a loud political rally in your front yard at 3:00 AM not because it opposes the content of your speech but because it’s a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction.

Likewise, gag orders are Constitutional because they seek not to silence the content of speech but to preserve the integrity of a trial.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They put out what they got from the prosecution. Where’s the gag for them?

You're just kind of spitballing at this point, aren't ya?

"All interested parties in this matter, including the parties and their counsel, are prohibited from making any public statements, or directing others to make any public statements, that target (1) the Special Counsel prosecuting this case or his staff; (2) defense counsel or their staff; (3) any of this court’s staff or other supporting personnel; or (4) any reasonably foreseeable witness or the substance of their testimony. This Order shall not be construed to prohibit Defendant from making statements criticizing the government generally, including the current administration or the Department of Justice; statements asserting that Defendant is innocent of the charges against him, or that his prosecution is politically motivated; or statements criticizing the campaign platforms or policies of Defendant’s current political rivals, such as former Vice President Pence. In addition, the sealed version of the government’s Motion to Ensure that Extrajudicial Statements Do Not Prejudice These Proceedings, ECF No. 56, is DENIED as moot. Date: October 17, 2023 Tanya S. Chutkan TANYA S. CHUTKAN United States District Judge Case 1"

 

[WinterBorn]

They put out what they got from the prosecution. Where’s the gag for them?

If there was a gag order in place when the information was released, then prosecute the prosecution. This in no way shows gag orders to be unconstitutional.

 

[WinterBorn]

No they aren’t. Their material was already out in the news.

Was the gag order in place before they released the information?

 

[jc456]

You're just kind of spitballing at this point, aren't ya?

"All interested parties in this matter, including the parties and their counsel, are prohibited from making any public statements, or directing others to make any public statements, that target (1) the Special Counsel prosecuting this case or his staff; (2) defense counsel or their staff; (3) any of this court’s staff or other supporting personnel; or (4) any reasonably foreseeable witness or the substance of their testimony. This Order shall not be construed to prohibit Defendant from making statements criticizing the government generally, including the current administration or the Department of Justice; statements asserting that Defendant is innocent of the charges against him, or that his prosecution is politically motivated; or statements criticizing the campaign platforms or policies of Defendant’s current political rivals, such as former Vice President Pence. In addition, the sealed version of the government’s Motion to Ensure that Extrajudicial Statements Do Not Prejudice These Proceedings, ECF No. 56, is DENIED as moot. Date: October 17, 2023 Tanya S. Chutkan TANYA S. CHUTKAN United States District Judge Case 1"

Not at all. I posted the video

 

[jc456]

Was the gag order in place before they released the information?

No and yes. The pre release is still available. Again, I posted the video

 

[WinterBorn]

No and yes. The pre release is still available

So you are saying the prosecution released all that to the media during the trial and after the gag order was put in place?