UPDATED: A New York judge fined Donald Trump $5,000 on Friday for violating a gag order barring him from defaming court officials.
“Make no mistake: future violations, whether intentional or unintentional, will punish the offender with far more severe sanctions, which may include, but are not limited to, increased fines, contempt of court against Donald Trump, and possibly his imprisonment,” New York state law states, Judge Arthur Engoron wrote in an order. Read the order.
Engoron issued a verbal injunction against Trump earlier this month after he posted an attack on the court clerk on Truth Social, the former president’s social media site. Trump deleted the post, but Engoron said Friday he discovered the post had not been removed from DonaldJTrump.com, Trump’s campaign website. It was removed late last night, the judge said, but only in response to an email “from this court.”
Trump’s lawyer said in court today that the post was left in by mistake and was an “unfortunate part of the process built into the fabric of the campaign.”
However, Engoron determined that this was still a violation of the gag order and remained on the site for 17 days.
“In today’s overheated climate, inflammatory falsehoods can lead to serious physical harm and worse,” he wrote.
Engoron said the court was “well past the ‘warning stage’ and ordered that the fine be paid to the New York Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection within the next ten days.”
Earlier this week, the judge in Trump’s federal criminal trial in Washington DC imposed a partial gag order barring him from attacking court staff, prosecutors and witnesses. Trump faces four conspiracy charges related to his efforts to stay in power after the 2020 presidential election.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said violations of the gag order could result in sanctions, but did not specify the amount of the fine.
Chutkan suspended her gag order while Trump’s legal team appealed her decision. In a filing today, his lawyers wrote that the gag order “violates virtually every fundamental principle of our First Amendment jurisprudence.” It places an overly broad preemptive content restriction on the leading presidential candidate’s major political speeches — despite the Supreme Court’s mandate that it is in the campaign for political office that First Amendment rights find their fullest and most pressing application.”
Trump and his companies are defendants in the civil suit in New York over allegations that they inflated the value of assets to obtain more favorable loan and contract terms.
Source: Deadline
Mary Crossley is an author at “The Fashion Vibes”. She is a seasoned journalist who is dedicated to delivering the latest news to her readers. With a keen sense of what’s important, Mary covers a wide range of topics, from politics to lifestyle and everything in between.
