U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said Friday

That

Former President Trump’s right to free speech is ‘not absolute’

before during

the process of trying to overturn the 2020 elections and stay in power.

Trump’s legal team and members of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s legal team appeared before Chutkan

Friday

at a hearing to resolve the language that will appear in a protection order that dictates how information and evidence

in it must be shared with the defense as part of

the discovery process can be shared before and during the trial. A protection order is a normal part of a criminal justice process.

Mr. Trump, like every American, has the right to freedom of speech in the First Amendment. But that right is not absolute… The freedom of expression of the accused is subject to the conditions of release imposed at the time of arraignment and must give way to the orderly administration of justice,

Chutkanshe

said.

Trump’s legal team and members of special counsel Jack Smith’s legal team appeared before Chutkan Friday at a hearing to resolve the language that will appear in a protective order that dictates how information and evidence to be shared with the defense as part of the discovery process, can be shared before and during the process. A protection order is a normal part of a criminal justice process.

Trump is accused of involvement

multiple

conspiracies designed to overturn the results of the 2020 election and keep him in power.

A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime followed by one of the conspirators openly acting to commit the crime.

He has pleaded not guilty.

Trump has been critical

the limitations limitations

Smith wants to be included in the protection order,

casting say something like that

restrictions on

what he can talk about

would infringe an infringement of

his right to freedom of expression.

Trump’s attorney, John Lauro, repeatedly

mentioned cited

the 2024

election campaign

at the hearing, saying there are restrictions on what information Trump can share online or on the

campaign

trail while seeking the GOP presidential nomination could hurt his own

opportunity campaign

.

“We are in uncharged waters, we have a defendant running for president and his opponent has the DOJ press charges against him,” Lauro said.

Chutkan said Laura

what is

“confusing what your client needs to do to defend himself and what your client wants to do politically. Your client’s defense should be done in this courtroom, not on the internet.”

Chutkan She added that said

Trump making comments about witnesses, even when defending himself against opponents, could disrupt the case.

His current political campaign must give way to an orderly administration of justice, Chutkan said. Regardless of what’s going on with his, I hate to say, his day job, this is a criminal case. The need to keep this in order and protect witnesses, and the integrity of the process means there will be restrictions on the defendant’s speech.

Chutkan emphasized

repeatedly

that the 2024 campaign will not affect any decisions she makes on the case.

“I cannot and will not take into account in my decisions the impact it will have on a political campaign from either side,” she said.

when Trump’s attorney repeatedly cited the 2024 campaign during a hearing on how to distribute government-gathered evidence before or during the trial

.

But for the protection order,

Chutkan rejected Smith’s request to prevent Trump and his legal team from disclosing materials they receive as part of the discovery to anyone other than his legal team, potential witnesses, the witness attorneys, or others approved by the court. Instead, as Trump’s team requested, she narrowed the wording to ban

Trump and his lawyer Shim and his team

of releasing material considered sensitive. Chutkan noted that the government can assess whether the small amount of non-sensitive material it planned to hand over

to the defence

should be classified as sensitive again.

Prosecutors said they were afraid

edit

Trump would thwart the case by publicly sharing information that could hinder finding an impartial jury or

used for

intimate witnesses.

Trump’s legal team, led by

lawyer John

Lauro, in a 29-page motion Monday, suggested that the court should loosely define and expand with whom Trump can share sensitive information to prepare his defense for volunteer attorneys, expert witnesses, investigators or others without paid employment contracts. Chutkan rejected that request, saying it was so overly broad that even an unindicted co-conspirator could

to get

access to the information.

I’m not comfortable with that broad definition that could encompass just about anyone, she said.

Laura said no

Rental

the legal team

Unpleasant

use volunteers

attack of

evidence it will receive from the Special Counsel in the coming weeks, “will cripple us in incredible ways.

“This is a huge case and it is impossible to be ready for it [on the special counsel’s timeline of a Jan. 2 trial date] unless we can enlist the help of others,” he said.

So Chutkan

hit one

compromise

i.e

between some prosecutors and the defense

requested from the requested court

by deciding to allow Trump to review sensitive material without being accompanied by his legal team, but

she

maintained the position that his notes should be checked to make sure he did not write down any personally identifiable information. She also said Trump should not have access to an electronic device such as a cell phone or photocopier while viewing sensitive materials.

And that The

defense

will also be needed

regain control of the materials when Trump is

done with them done

or takes a break, and he is not allowed to carry

prove them

all around

Prosecutor

Thomas Windom, addressing the judge on behalf of special counsel, had insisted that a defense attorney be in the room with Trump as he reviewed documents, saying this would increase the risk of

the former president him

copy or take

a

image

S

of sensitive materials.

He has shown a tendency to hold on to material he shouldn’t, Windom said,

in a

No

thing

to the separate case Smith brought to accuse Trump of withholding classified documents after he left office

and after a subpoena ordering him to return them

.