Donald Trump's gag order and
the federal election interference case
just put on hold.
CNN's chief
legal affairs
correspondent Paula Reid
is working this important story for us.
Paula, tell us more about this ruling.
Wolf, here
a federal appeals court
has temporarily frozen
a gag order
imposed on former President
Trump here in Washington.
And they have fast
tracked an oral argument
about whether this is constitutional.
And we'll hear those arguments
on November 20th.
Now, this gag order was imposed by Judge
Tonya Junkin.
She's the federal judge
overseeing the election subversion
case brought by special counsel
Jack Smith here in the District.
And she imposed this gag order
barring Trump from targeting witnesses
in the case, members of the court staff
and even the special counsel
itself, the prosecutors
working on this case
and you
that gag order
at the request of prosecutors.
But she did not limit
his ability
to talk about
Washington, D.C., the potential jury pool
or the Justice Department,
which prosecutors had
also sought protections
for those two groups.
But here she has argued,
she has said, look, I understand
he has a First Amendment right,
but that must yield to the
administration of justice.
And she said that
she has to put on a trial.
She needs to protect members
of her staff,
people involved in this case,
just trying to do their jobs.
And that is why she has imposed
this gag order.
And she also
declined to freeze it herself
while these appeals play out.
The former president's lawyers,
though, have argued
that this is a violation
of his First Amendment.
They point to the fact
that he is once again
running for the White House
and that what they describe
as quote, political speech
deserves the highest protection.
But a three judge panel
will hear arguments on this issue
in just a few weeks.
This is a pretty fast track here.
Pretty quick move
from this decision
to freeze to oral arguments.
Wolf,
it appears that the court of appeals
is mindful
of the need to decide this issue quickly
and keep this case moving along
Paula.
Can the government appeal this ruling?
Well, this is the appeals process.
It will depend on what
the appeals court ultimately decides.
They here are going to hear arguments
on November 20th.
Then they will make a decision.
If either side does
not like how that turns out,
they can certainly
appeal to the Supreme Court.
All right, Paula, stand by.
We got more questions for you.
Also tonight, we're following another
we're following new developments
in another of Trump's
cases, the civil fraud case
in New York City.
This carrier scandal
is just outside the courthouse
in Manhattan for us.
Kara, tell us about Eric Trump's
testimony today under oath
and what we can expect from Donald Trump
and Ivanka's
testimony scheduled next week.
Well, Eric Trump
completed his testimony today.
All told,
he was on the stand
for about 4 hours over the past two days.
And the attorney general's office
is really focusing in
on these financial statements
that are at the center of this lawsuit.
Eric Trump
testifying that he relied
on accountants and lawyers
and when they give him comfort
that the statements were, quote, perfect,
he said he was happy to sign off on them.
He also said he wouldn't sign
something that was inaccurate.
And just a reminder,
the judge has already found that
these statements are fraudulent.
Now, outside the courthouse,
Eric Trump was defiant,
also standing by his testimony
and attacking the attorney
general's investigation. Take a listen.
The last couple days have got great.
You know why they've done great?
Because we haven't done
a damn thing wrong.
And they dragged on an eye into it
as collateral damage. You know why?
Because if you can line up as many Trumps
as you possibly can,
she can sit in court
for an extra a couple of days,
and then she can send fundraising emails
every single day to her
donor base saying, I'm going after Trump.
Now, Donald Trump will be on the stand
on Monday.
He's expected to sit
for a full day of questioning
under oath
by the attorney general's office.
He'll be sitting
just inches from the judge
who he has attacked on social media.
And the attorney general
is likely to be in the courtroom.
She has attended
every court date
that the former president has been in.
Once this testimony wraps,
then it will be a vanco Trump's turn.
She stopped her effort
to block her testimony,
dropping her appeal.
So she will be testifying on Wednesday
after that,
the new york attorney
general's office is expected
to rest their case,
and then it will be Donald
Trump's turn to see if he's going
to put on any defense Wolf.
All right, Kara, thank you.
Kara Scannell in New York for us.
Appreciate it.
Paula Reid is still with us.
I also want to bring in former
federal prosecutor Jennifer Rogers,
along with former assistant U.S.
attorney for the Southern District
of New York, Ellie Hoenig.
To all of you,
thanks very much for joining us.
Ellie, let me start with you.
What's your reaction to this freeze?
Are you surprised?
Well, Wolf, I've never seen anything
quite like this, I have to say.
And just so people can sort of
follow the history here quickly,
Judge Chuck in imposed
the gag order first,
but then she put it on hold
to give Donald Trump's team
a chance to appeal it.
However, Donald Trump
then pretty much immediately
violated it while it was on hold.
And so Judge Chuck and said,
okay, I'm unfreezing it.
I'm putting the gag order back in place.
And what the appeals court has now
done is said, hold on.
We're going to put it on hold.
So as we sit here
a few minutes after 6 p.m.
Eastern time, the gag order is on hold.
But I take two lessons out of this.
First of all,
the appeals court
is taking Donald Trump's
First Amendment argu arguments seriously.
They're going to hear him out.
But second of all,
they've signaled to Donald Trump,
you're on a very short leash here.
We intend to move very, very quickly.
So we'll have to wait and see what
the appeals court does in
the next couple of days.
Important point, Jennifer Rogers.
As you know,
Trump has argued
that this gag order
violated his First Amendment rights.
And as Ellie, just said it,
it looks like the appeals court
is taking that argument seriously.
Right?
They are.
There are some thorny issues here, Wolf.
I mean, we never before
have had a presidential candidate
under indictment
making comments about his rival
and his rivals, Justice
Department, who's prosecute them.
So there really are unchartered
territory here,
which is why
I think the appellate court
does want to take its time
and it makes sense for them
to freeze the gag order while they do so
so that Trump can ultimately say somehow
try this.
I think, though
and Ellie was hinting at this,
it would be really foolhardy.
I think of Trump to violate the gag order
that isn't currently in place,
but to violate the terms of it.
Now, it would give
the special counsel's office
a lot of ammunition
to say to the appellate court,
listen, this is why we need this.
Look at what he's saying
and look at the potential impact on the
all the parties here.
So let me go back to Paula
while I have you.
Paula, this is some rare
good news for Trump.
It is many, many legal problems
that we all know about.
What does this order mean for the case?
What do you think?
Well, for the time being,
he is not restricted in his ability
to discuss prosecutors,
witnesses and court staff, Though,
as our colleague just noted,
it's not a good idea
to do that right now, right
before this goes
before the appellate court.
But we have seen
when gag orders
have been lifted in the past,
he sometimes takes the opportunity
to really play at the edges
of what he is allowed to do.
All defendants have certain restrictions.
You are not supposed to
intimidate witnesses. Right.
And it's unheard of to attack prosecutors
or attack that judge.
So an extraordinary circumstance here.
His team, though,
at least wanted to be heard
by the appellate court
and potentially they could try to appeal
this all the way
to the Supreme Court,
depending how this goes
on, this issue of political speech
and the potential infringement on hers,
his First Amendment right.
That is the argument
that they are making,
and they will at least be heard
before this three judge panel.
It's unclear, though,
which way this will go.
Ellie, this gag order, as you
know, was put in place
because Trump was accused
of actually threatening people.
Does that mean he can go back
to doing that now,
even if it's not advisable?
Boy, I would advise strongly
against that.
Technically,
he can now comment on the witnesses.
But as Jennifer said,
if he does that, this court of appeals
might very well say, okay,
you've pushed us
here, we're going to reinstitute it.
And just to be clear, Wolf,
when Judge Chuck in gave Trump's team
the courtesy of putting it on
hold a few days ago,
within hours,
Trump was out on social media
attacking Mark Meadows,
attacking Bill Barr,
both of whom are likely
to be crucial witnesses in this case.
It would have violated the gag order
had Judge Shulkin not put it on hold.
So both levels of courts
here are giving Trump some leeway,
but he may be very ill advised
to continue violating that.
Jennifer,
do you expect that this gag order
will ultimately come back,
at least in some form?
I'm sorry, Wolf.
I missed the question.
Do you think this gag order
will eventually come back,
at least in some form?
I do.
I think particularly the part
about attacking witnesses is bulletproof.
I don't think the appellate court
will overturn that.
There could be some changes
on the margins
without commenting
on the special counsel's office.
But I do think
certainly at least
part of the witness part
is definitely going to stay in place
once the appellate court
has a chance to hear it thoroughly.
I'm wondering, Paula,
how unusual is this move
from the appeals court?
Well, it's not uncommon for them to agree
to hear a dispute like this.
We are, as
we are so often
with former President Trump,
just in an extraordinary situation.
And the question of the limits
of free speech for a criminal defendant
who's also a leading candidate
for the White House.
I mean, that's
something that's
just never been contemplated
by the courts before.
So it's not surprising
that this appellate court
is willing to take up
this case, hear arguments on both sides
and render a decision, gives some clarity
because this is likely an issue
that could come up again
in this case and potentially
in other cases,
because, of course, at the state level,
he's also under a gag order in New York.
But he's also facing
another federal prosecution
in Florida with the special counsel.
It's possible this could come up there.
So it would be good to get
maybe some clarity,
at least from this federal court
and possibly,
possibly the Supreme Court on this.
I will see.
We shall see.
Paula. Jennifer in L.A.
guys, thank you very, very much.