Granting a request by federal prosecutors, the judge overseeing former President Donald J. He ordered his attorney to redact his name. or harassment.
In a 24-page decision, Judge Eileen M. Cannon asked Trump's lawyers not to identify witnesses in their submissions, but rather to use pseudonyms or declarative statements (such as names such as John Smith and FBI agents). 1 etc.). name.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has expressed deep concerns about the safety of witnesses, and the issue is also implicated in several of Mr. Trump's criminal cases. Among the people prosecutors sought to protect were Trump's “career public servants and former aides,” some of whom were so concerned about potential threats from “Trump World” that investigators This included people who told prosecutors that they had refused permission to be recorded. Interview with him.
Judge Cannon's decision, which reversed the original decision on the issue, was notable simply for its adherence to standard practice. The judge is under intense scrutiny after issuing a series of unconventional rulings and allowing cases to become bogged down with a slew of unresolved legal issues. Each of her decisions is closely studied by legal experts to indicate how she intends to proceed with other matters.
But as she has done in other rulings in favor of Mr. Smith, Judge Cannon used Tuesday's ruling to attack the special prosecutor with whom she has been feuding. She agreed with him, but said his request for “protection without discrimination for all potential government witnesses” was “broad in nature” and that “another high-profile “We were unable to find any incidents that would bring this together.” decision.
The dispute over witnesses began in early February, when Mr. Smith's prosecutors told Judge Cannon that Mr. Trump would release the names of about two dozen witnesses in a court filing seeking additional discovery information from the government. It began in earnest with a request to reconsider the decision.
Prosecutors told Judge Cannon they did not understand why the lawyers needed to identify witnesses as part of their request for further information. Mr. Trump's lawyers have argued that he has free speech rights to name witnesses, but Mr. Smith's attorneys have dismissed that argument.
“This is not about Donald Trump vindicating the First Amendment,” one of the prosecutors, David Harbach, said at a hearing in the case last month. “It's not. And we have to call it out for what it is.”
Prosecutors also told Judge Cannon that if she refuses to overturn the initial ruling that allowed Trump to release his name, they intend to challenge her decision in the Court of Appeals. They said they were willing to confront her directly because her witnesses would be exposed to “intolerable and unnecessary risk” if publicly identified.
“There is a well-documented pattern of intimidation, harassment, and intimidation of judges, attorneys, prosecutors, and witnesses involved in cases involving Mr. Trump,” prosecutors said in a statement.
The judges in the former president's two other cases, one in Washington and another in Manhattan scheduled to go to trial next week, have ordered him to be removed from office, specifically to protect witnesses from the president's attacks. He imposed a command.