Did Donald Trump already violate the reimposed gag order in Washington?
Around 1 a.m. ET on Tuesday, the election subversion defendant and leading Republican presidential candidate posted to his social media platform, Truth Social: “REMEMBER, CROOKED JOE BIDEN AND HIS RADICAL LEFT THUGS WAITED THREE YEARS TO BRING THESE INDICTMENTS & LAWSUITS AGAINST ME, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF MY CAMPAIGN!”
Under the order, Trump can rail against Biden and call the case against him political. But he can’t go after special counsel Jack Smith or his staff. Indeed, when she initially imposed the order, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan cited the danger of Trump calling prosecutors “thugs.” She had asked his lawyer at a hearing earlier this month: If you call certain people “thugs” enough times, doesn’t that suggest that someone should get them off the streets?
So, how would Chutkan view Trump’s post if she analyzes it under the order she reimposed on Sunday? To understand her thinking, we can look to her opinion explaining the order’s parameters. There, she noted a previous Trump post that said:
Does anyone notice that the Election Rigging Biden Administration never goes after the Riggers, but only after those that want to catch and expose the Rigging dogs. Massive information and 100% evidence will be made available during the Corrupt Trials started by our Political Opponent. We will never let 2020 happen again. Look at the result, OUR COUNTRY IS BEING DESTROYED. MAGA!!!
Chutkan explained that that statement, posted to Truth Social on Oct. 20, wouldn’t violate her order’s prohibition on targeting certain individuals. Trump’s Oct. 20 statement “asserts that Defendant is innocent, that his prosecution is politically motivated, and that the Biden administration is corrupt,” the judge wrote.
When it comes to the new post in question, it may similarly be deemed a statement that Trump is innocent, that his prosecution is politically motivated, and that the Biden administration is corrupt. But it arguably goes further than that in referring to Biden’s “RADICAL LEFT THUGS” who charged him. That can be fairly read to include prosecutors, especially when noting the use of “thugs” that Chutkan previously called out.
To be sure, Trump didn’t name Smith, in perhaps a half-clever attempt by the former president to avoid consequences while he appeals Chutkan’s order. By their actions or inactions, we’ll soon learn what the Justice Department and, more importantly, Chutkan, think of it.
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal newsletter for weekly updates on the top legal stories, including news from the Supreme Court, the Donald Trump cases and more.
