New York Appeals Court Upholds Gag Order on Trump, Putting Constitutional Rights in 'Procedural Purgatory'

 In a recent development, a New York appeals court has once again upheld the gag order that prevents former President Donald Trump from making comments about court personnel in his civil fraud trial. The court ruled that Trump's lawyers used the wrong legal mechanism to fight against the restriction by suing trial Judge Arthur Engoron instead of following the normal appeals process. According to the four-judge panel, Trump's lawyers should have first asked Engoron to reverse the gag order and then, if denied, taken the matter to a higher court.

However, Trump's lawyer Christopher Kise argued that this decision denies his client the only path available for expedited relief and puts his constitutional rights in a procedural purgatory. The ruling comes just a day after the conclusion of the 2½-month trial in the lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. Closing arguments are scheduled for January 11, with the case posing a threat to Trump's real estate empire. Engoron expressed hope to reach a verdict by the end of January. Trump's lawyers had filed a lawsuit last month, objecting to the gag order as an abuse of power, under a state law known as Article 78.

However, the panel ruled that the gag order cannot be challenged through this method, citing a prior ruling from the highest court in the state that characterized such lawsuits as an "extraordinary remedy." The gag order was imposed by Engoron on October 3 after Trump made derogatory comments about the judge's law clerk on social media, including baseless allegations about the clerk's personal life. Judge David Friedman of the appeals court temporarily suspended the gag order on November 16, but it was later restored by a four-judge panel on November 30.

During the initial weeks of the trial, Engoron fined Trump $15,000 for violating the gag order. The judge decided to extend the order to include lawyers after Trump's attorneys questioned the law clerk's prominent role on the bench. State lawyers have supported the restriction, considering it a reasonable step to protect Engoron's staff. It has been noted that Trump's comments have led to an increase in negative calls and messages directed at the judge and the law clerk.