Trump Shocked After Getting Support From The Unexpected

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

( – In recent legal developments, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has petitioned the presiding judge in the criminal case against former U.S. President Donald Trump regarding the 2020 election. The ACLU argues that the gag order imposed on Trump is both unclear and unconstitutional in its scope.

While no one disputes that Donald Trump, now a defendant, has made numerous contentious statements, some of which have allegedly damaged the democratic framework, the ACLU asserts that he still possesses the First Amendment right to free speech. Additionally, the public retains an interest in hearing his viewpoints. The gag order was initially put into effect by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan after special counsel Jack Smith petitioned the court, citing inflammatory posts Trump made on Truth Social that criticized the judiciary and individuals involved in his case.

Trump is currently facing multiple federal charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election’s outcome. He has pleaded not guilty and has undertaken several legal maneuvers to get the charges dismissed.

Judge Chutkan’s order restricts Trump and his legal team from making comments that might “target” foreseeable witnesses, prosecutors, or court staff. Trump is presently appealing this order. The ACLU points out that the language of the order is so ambiguous that it could violate Trump’s right to due process. The civil liberties organization contends that the term “target” is not clearly defined, leaving Trump in a precarious position where he cannot be certain of what he is allowed or disallowed to say.

The ACLU also maintains that the gag order excessively infringes upon Trump’s First Amendment rights, potentially limiting his ability to comment on significant aspects of his political campaign, the 2020 election outcome, or the events of January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol.

Considering the case’s high profile, the ACLU argues that the gag order is unlikely to preserve the impartiality of prospective jurors, given the already widespread media coverage.

This is one of two gag orders against Trump; the other is in a New York civil fraud case, where he was fined for violating a more limited gag order. Trump recently testified in the New York case, confirming comments he made that questioned the impartiality of the presiding judge and his clerk, leading to a $10,000 fine.

These unfolding legal dramas continue to capture national attention, and the ACLU’s intervention underscores the complexities surrounding free speech and legal proceedings.

Copyright 2023,