Trump's Obsession With Gag Orders Stems From a Need To 'Blame' Someone If He Loses the Case, Says Legal Expert

In a recent move, a New York appellate judge has firmly rejected the efforts of former President Donald Trump to ease the constraints of his gag order. Meanwhile, legal analyst Lisa Rubin underscored the crucial nature of lifting this restriction, suggesting that Trump is actively seeking someone to hold responsible for certain matters, as per Raw Story. Amid this, MSNBC's Ali Velshi delved into the specifics of the gag order's provisions, directing his question to Rubin for further clarification on her statement. 

Velshi wanted to understand Trump and his team's insistence on targeting Allison Greenfield, the law clerk of presiding Judge Arthur Engoron. He noted that these gag orders appear to revolve around preventing potentially disparaging remarks that Trump and his team might make concerning witnesses, court personnel, and individuals connected to the case. "Why is Trump arguing that this is somehow material to Trump's testimony or what he can say on the stand? Why is Judge Engoron's clerk relevant to the outcome of this case?" he questioned. Rubin responded by saying, "Judge Engoron's principal law clerk has been a candidate for office in New York."

Judge Engoron, too, holds the distinction of being an elected official—a Supreme Court judge elected within the state of New York. Rubin further added, “Their argument is that her involvement in partisan politics in New York necessarily makes her a biased actor." The legal analyst further stated, "The fact that she sits next to Judge Engoron on his bench and has been repeatedly seen either talking to him in undetectable whispers, passing notings to him—they've accused her of rolling her eyes at them, yelling at them, speaking at them in ways they characterize as disrespectful."

Rubin elaborated on the significance of this issue. As per her analysis, preceding the trial's conclusion, the Trump team aimed to assert their right to create a formal record before the appeal, essentially documenting what they perceived as biases during the ongoing trial proceedings. “I'm not sure why it is that during the course of this trial he needs to be able to say that. It would seem to me they've already preserved their objection to that on appeal. They can continue to do that once the appeal starts. But to them, they are characterizing this as a matter of poor political speech," she said.

Carrying the conversation further, she said, “And the politics of this, I think, says everything. This is a core political speech act, according to them, and he has a right to defend himself against her political bias. But really what this is about, is about appealing to their base and being able to blame what they see is the likely outcome of this trial on someone else, and chiefly the judge's principal law clerk."

Meanwhile, as reported by Reuters, Justice Engoron enforced a gag order on Trump on October 3, 2023, prohibiting him from making public statements concerning court staff. Engoron took this action following Trump's sharing of a photo on social media. While an appellate court temporarily suspended the gag order, it was put back in place by a mid-level state appeals court last week. Subsequently, Engoron further limited Trump's lawyers' ability to speak about his staff through an additional and distinct order.