A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s gag order prohibiting Trump from criticizing the special counsel, Jack Smith, or “any foreseeable witness” in the case. [2-Page Opinion Here]  In my opinion, it was the generalized “foreseeable witness” part of the Chutkan order that became the central issue for the appellate court.   Jack Smith could name anyone as a potential witness, just to silence the accused.

President Trump’s team previously indicated in their filing to the appeals court that they are prepared to seek immediate relief at the Supreme Court. However, at least now, that approach will not be needed as the DC Appellate Court has blocked the gag order.

[ SOURCE LINK ]

It is a win for Donald Trump amid a highly political DC Circuit.

If the appeals court had ruled to uphold the gag order, they would have opened the door for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in and potentially overturn the lower rulings.  Therefore, appeals court was most likely not willing to see their own credibility rest on the language of a motion written by Judge Chutkan.

In the ruling, the appeals court will accept briefings and oral arguments prior to making their own ruling on the matter.  That will make any advancement to the Supreme Court much less likely to succeed.  There’s a bit of court credibility and preservation playing out in this dynamic.

WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court on Friday lifted a gag order reining in Donald Trump’s comments about the criminal election-subversion case pending against him in Washington.

At the former president’s request, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily lifted U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s order prohibiting Trump from using his public statements to target special counsel Jack Smith and his team, court officials and potential witnesses in the case.

The appeals court’s action makes it likely that the gag order, which Trump contends violates his First Amendment rights and those of his supporters, will be sidelined for more than two weeks and perhaps longer. Trump has also complained that the order interferes with his rights as a presidential candidate to argue to voters that he is being politically persecuted by the Biden administration.

The D.C. Circuit set oral arguments on the gag order issue for Nov. 20. The panel issuing the order consisted of two Obama appointees — Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard — as well as the court’s newest member, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia. (read more)

…”No court in American history has imposed a gag order on a criminal defendant who is actively campaigning for public office—let alone the leading candidate for President of the United States. That centuries-long practice was broken on October 17, 2023, when the district court entered its Opinion and Order, A1 (the “Gag Order”), muzzling President Trump’s core political speech during an historic Presidential campaign.

Given the Gag Order’s extraordinary nature, one would expect an extraordinary justification for it. Yet none exists. President Trump has made months of public statements about this case, but the Department of Justice (“the prosecution”) submitted no evidence of any actual or imminent threat to the administration of justice. Instead, when asked about the supposed threat to the case, the prosecution admitted, “of course this prejudice is speculative.”

Based this speculation, the district court entered a sweeping, viewpoint-based prior restraint on the core political speech of a major Presidential candidate, based solely on an unconstitutional “heckler’s veto.” The Gag Order violates the First Amendment rights of President Trump and over 100 million Americans who listen to him.

President Trump’s uniquely powerful voice has been a fixture of American political discourse for eight years, and central to the American fabric for decades. The prosecution’s claim that his core political speech suddenly poses a threat to the administration of justice is baseless. The prosecutors and potential witnesses addressed by President Trump’s speech are high-level government officials and public figures, many of whom routinely attack President Trump in their own public statements, media interviews, and books.

President Trump’s viewpoint and modes of expression resonate powerfully with tens of millions of Americans. The prosecution’s request for a Gag Order bristles with hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint and his relentless criticism of the government—including of the prosecution itself. The Gag Order embodies this unconstitutional hostility to President Trump’s viewpoint. It should be immediately stayed.

President Trump requests a ruling on this motion by November 10, 2023, and requests an administrative stay pending the Court’s ruling. President Trump has notified the prosecution, who note that they oppose this motion. President Trump respectfully asks that this appeal be expedited to the greatest extent possible.”..

~ President Donald J Trump, Legal Team