During an appearance on CNN this week, a former judge from California said she could easily imagine the imminent imposition of a gag order restricting statements by former President Donald Trump amid his ongoing criminal proceedings. The issue has specifically emerged in the context of the federal charges that Trump is now facing over his attempts to stay in power after the last presidential election despite his documented loss to Joe Biden.
“That certainly would get me thinking, if I were the trial judge, about a gag order in this case,” retired California Superior Court Judge LaDoris Hazzard Cordell told Kaitlan Collins, referring specifically to concerning comments that the ex-president recently made. “It’s clearly a threat, and a good trial judge doesn’t just look at the law, you use common sense.” Cordell said she anticipated Trump would quickly violate such a gag order, if it was actually imposed. “And then we’ll see what the judge does in terms of consequences for violating yet another court order,” the former judge added.
“IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!” Trump recently remarked online. A spokesperson associated with the former president claimed these comments referred to special interest groups and super PACs, straining credibility for some.
Trump posted the disputed rhetoric in close proximity to other specific complaints about the criminal charges that he is facing, and there is a precedent of supporters of the ex-president using his comments as the direct excuse for damaging violence like was seen at the Capitol in early 2021. And it’s not just that occasion. For example, there was also the incident involving an evident Trump supporter who died in a shootout with police after attempting to storm an FBI office not long after the federal law enforcement agency conducted a raid at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.
Now, prosecutors are seeking a protective order, which would be less sweeping than the potential gag order that Cordell referenced. Trump has credited Biden for the push from prosecutors for a protective order, but there’s no evidence he’s behind it.
