Judge rejects Trump’s bid to get Georgia election case dismissed
Summary
TLDRA Georgia judge upheld the criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump, rejecting the argument that his efforts to overturn the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment. The case moves towards a potential trial, with the district attorney aiming for an August start, though a specific date has not been set. The judge's decision is consistent with other rulings related to Trump's attempts to challenge the election results, and Trump's legal team is considering their options moving forward.
Takeaways
- 📜 A Georgia judge upheld the criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump, rejecting the argument that his efforts to overturn the 2020 election were protected by the First Amendment.
- 🧑💼 Trump's lawyers argued that his political speech and claims about voter fraud should be protected, but the judge found no authority to support this claim.
- 👨⚖️ Judge Scott McAfee stated that the defense's argument should be heard by a jury, not decided during pretrial motions, indicating the case may proceed to trial.
- 📅 The District Attorney has requested for the trial to start on August 5th, but no official start date has been set by Judge McAfee yet.
- 🤝 Other judges, including Judge Tonya Chuck, have also rejected the First Amendment argument in relation to Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
- 💬 Trump's lead attorney in Georgia, Steve Setout, has declined to comment on the ruling but has previously argued for the case to be dismissed.
- 🤔 The judge's decision does not rule out the possibility for the defense to bring up the First Amendment issue during the trial.
- 📊 The case against Trump in Georgia remains intact, with ongoing pretrial motions and potential future attempts to dismiss the case.
- 🚨 There is speculation about a potential gag order being filed by the Trump team regarding public comments on the case by the District Attorney and others involved.
- 💰 In a separate case, the New York Attorney General's office is requesting more information about the $175 million bond posted by Trump, questioning the financial backing of the bond's underwriter.
Q & A
What is the breaking news reported by CNN?
-A judge in Georgia has upheld the criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump, rejecting the argument that his efforts to overturn the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment.
What was the main argument presented by Trump's lawyers in the Fulton County, Georgia hearing?
-Trump's lawyers argued that the political speech and claims about voter fraud that Trump was pushing after the 2020 election are protected by the First Amendment, and thus the case should be thrown out.
How did Judge Scott McAfee respond to the defense's argument?
-Judge Scott McAfee rejected the argument, stating that the defense has not presented, nor is the court able to find any authority that the speech and conduct alleged is protected political speech.
What did Judge McAfee say about the argument being heard by a jury?
-Judge McAfee said that this argument should be heard by a jury, not decided during pretrial motions.
What is the current status of the trial date?
-The District Attorney has asked for a trial to start on August 5th, but Judge McAfee has not set a start date on the calendar yet.
What did the Fulton County District Attorney Connie Willis argue in court?
-Connie Willis argued that the speech used in furtherance of an alleged crime is not protected under the First Amendment, and she is ready to go to trial as soon as August.
What is the issue with the $175 million bond posted by Trump in a separate fraud case?
-The New York Attorney General's office wants more information about the bond's underwriter, which is based in California and not regulated by New York, to ensure the bond can be backed and supported.
How did the New York Attorney General's office respond to the bond posted by Trump?
-They requested more information within ten days to validate the bond, or else it will not be considered valid.
What is the potential outcome if the bond is not validated?
-If the bond is not validated, Trump may need to partner with another company regulated in New York or get a court to agree to the current bond situation.
What is the general view of the legal analyst Jennifer Rogers on Trump's First Amendment challenge?
-Jennifer Rogers views the First Amendment challenge as a delay tactic by Trump's team, aiming to appeal and delay the proceedings rather than focusing on the merits of the case.
What is the next step for the defendants in the Georgia case?
-The defense team, including Trump's attorney Steve Saito, will continue to evaluate their options regarding the First Amendment challenges and may raise the issue again in court.
Outlines
📢 Breaking News on Trump Indictment
The paragraph discusses the recent decision by Judge Scott McAfee in Georgia to uphold the criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump. Trump's lawyers argued that his efforts to overturn the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment, but the judge rejected this claim. The case is moving towards a potential trial, with the District Attorney seeking a start date of August 5th, although no official date has been set yet. This decision is significant as it is not the first time Trump's First Amendment argument has been rejected in relation to the 2020 election. The defense is considering further options and motions to possibly dismiss the case.
💬 Discussion on Gag Order and Legal Strategies
This paragraph focuses on the possibility of a gag order being requested in the case against Trump and his allies. Fulton County District Attorney Connie Willis has been publicly commenting on the case, leading to discussions among defendants and their attorneys about limiting public comments. Judge McAfee has allowed Willis to stay on the case and has suggested that a gag order might be appropriate. There is also an ongoing appeal to disqualify Willis, with some defense attorneys hoping for a more favorable outcome before considering a gag order. The paragraph highlights the delicate balance between protecting free speech and ensuring a fair trial process.
💰 Trump's Fraud Case and Bond Issue
The paragraph covers the developments in a separate fraud case involving Trump and the New York attorney general's office. Trump has posted a $175 million bond, but the New York attorney general's office is requesting more information about the underwriter of the bond, as it is based in California and not regulated by New York. The underwriter's financial stability is being questioned, and the office wants confirmation that the bond can be backed by the underwriter within ten days, or else it will not be valid. This adds pressure on Trump to provide assurance that the bond is financially sound. Legal analyst Jennifer Rogers comments on the situation, suggesting that it is a delay tactic from Trump's team and emphasizing the importance of ensuring that the bond is valid and enforceable.
🚨 First Amendment Challenges and Legal Proceedings
The final paragraph delves into the legal strategies employed by Trump's team, particularly the use of First Amendment challenges in multiple cases. These challenges argue that Trump's speeches and political comments should be protected, but the paragraph explains that this argument has consistently been rejected by the courts. The focus is on how the prosecution will need to clearly define the limits of political speech and ensure that criminal speech is not protected under the First Amendment. The discussion highlights the complexities of intertwining political and criminal speech in legal proceedings and the challenges that both the defense and prosecution face in these situations.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Judge Scott McAfee
💡Criminal Indictment
💡First Amendment
💡Trump's Lawyers
💡Potential Trial
💡Fulton County, Georgia
💡Election Subversion
💡Jury
💡Steve Said
💡Civil Motions
💡Gag Order
Highlights
A judge has upheld the criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump in Georgia.
The judge rejected the argument that Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment.
Trump's lawyers argued that his political speech and claims about voter fraud should be protected by the First Amendment.
Judge Scott McAfee stated that the defense has not presented any authority that the alleged speech and conduct is protected political speech.
The judge suggested that this argument should be heard by a jury, not decided during pretrial motions.
The District Attorney has asked for a trial to start on August 5th, but no start date has been set by Judge McAfee yet.
Judge McAfee is working through pretrial motions in Georgia, addressing issues before a trial can take place.
Judge Tonya Chuck also rejected the First Amendment argument from Trump's attorneys in a federal case against him for election subversion.
Trump's lead attorney in Georgia, Steve Said, declined to comment on the ruling and has filed several similar motions to try to get the case dismissed.
The case in Georgia against Trump remains intact despite attempts to dismiss it.
Trump's attorney Steve Said stated that they will look at their other options moving forward, despite disagreeing with the ruling.
Fulton County District Attorney Connie Willis is ready to go to trial as soon as August and has made her intentions clear.
There is speculation that a gag order may be filed requesting that the D.A. not make public comments about the case.
Trump posted a $175 million bond in a separate fraud case involving the New York attorney general's office.
The New York attorney general's office is requesting more information about the bond underwriter, as it is based in California and not regulated by New York.
The head of the bond underwriting company stated that Trump provided $175 million in cash as collateral.
The New York attorney general's office has given a ten-day deadline for more information about the bond, or else it will not be valid.
Legal analyst Jennifer Rogers suggests that the First Amendment challenge is a delay tactic by Trump's team.
Rogers indicates that the prosecutor's job will be to get a strong instruction from the judge about the limits of political speech.
Transcripts
This is CNN breaking news.
Thanks for joining us on CNN News
Central this afternoon.
We begin with breaking news.
A judge has upheld
the criminal indictment
against former
President Donald Trump in Georgia.
The judge there
rejecting the argument
that Trump's efforts to overturn
the 2020 election were protected
under the first amendment.
CNN's Zachary
Cohen is part of the team that broke
this story.
Zach, walk us
through this decision
by Judge Scott McAfee.
Yeah, Boris, you remember that we heard.
We watched a hearing in Fulton
County, Georgia, just about a week ago.
And Trump's lawyers argued strenuously
this entire case should be thrown out
because in his argument
that the political speech
and that the claims about voter fraud
that Trump was pushing after the 2020
election are protected
by the First Amendment now.
The judge today roundly
rejecting that argument,
as we've seen him
do multiple
other times in this case
for other defendants
in Georgia, saying, look quote
the defense has not presented,
nor is the court able
to find any authority
that the speech and conduct alleged
is protected political speech.
He goes on to say that
this argument is one
that should be heard by a jury,
not one that should be decided
during pretrial motions.
That was the argument
that prosecutors in Georgia
made about a week ago
in court before Judge McAfee.
So this is just an example of this case
in Georgia
inching towards a potential trial.
We know that the D.A.
there has asked for a trial
to start on August 5th.
But Judge McAfee has not put a start date
on the calendar yet.
That really is the big thing
we're looking for.
But again,
the judge continuing
to work
through these pretrial motions
in Georgia, continuing to work toward and
and address
these issues that have to be addressed
before a trial can take place.
And Zach,
Judge McAfee is not the first judge
to make
a ruling like this
related to Trump's efforts
to overturn the 2020 election
being related to the First Amendment.
Judge Tonya Chuck and also rejected
that argument from Trump's attorneys
in the federal case
against him for election subversion.
I'm wondering,
have you
heard anything from Trump's
Georgia attorneys
about this decision, how
they plan to proceed
Trump's lead
attorney in Georgia,
Steve set out,
has immediately
declined to comment on this ruling.
I'm sure we'll hear from him
eventually because he did push
and he was the main person
the main defense attorney
arguing this in court.
When we saw this hearing
take place just about a week ago.
And look,
Steve Said has filed a civil several
similar motions
to try to get this case thrown out
before a trial even happens.
Obviously, you know,
Trump is fighting multiple,
multiple legal fronts.
As you mentioned,
he tried the same argument
in his federal case with Judge
Tanya Chuck in who similarly rejected
the first minute arguments.
And when we saw the hearing
take place in Georgia,
you know,
prosecutors
referenced Judkins
ruling on this
First Amendment issue, too.
And like I mentioned earlier,
this is a similar argument
that some of Trump's
co-defendants in Georgia
have also tried to make,
and it was also rejected by Scott McAfee.
So we're going to see there's
other attempts
and unaddressed
attempts and motions on the table
still to try to get this case dismissed.
But for now,
the case in the indictment
against Trump in Georgia remains intact.
Is that Cohen?
Thank you so much for the update.
We have CNN's Sara Murray with us.
She's part of the team
that broke this story.
Sara,
walk us through some of the details.
Yeah, well, look,
we heard these arguments last week,
especially from Trump
attorney Steve started out
saying that, you know, everything
Donald Trump did in the state of Georgia
to overturn
the 20, 20
election should just be covered
under the First Amendment.
It's protected political speech
that the indictment
should just be tossed out.
The judge today
ruling he is not going to throw out
the indictment.
He did have some comments
about how essentially
using this speech
in furtherance of an alleged crime
means that is not protected
under the First Amendment.
He made that very clear.
Now, he didn't rule out the possibility
that defendants, including former
President Trump, could bring this up
later, potentially at a trial
in front of the jury.
And we heard from Trump
attorney Steve
State out today saying
while they disagree
with this ruling,
from the judge,
they're going
to look at their other options
moving forward, guys.
And so the timeline here,
what is the latest on this?
When might this actually get started?
You know, it's a great question, Sara.
Tell us everything I know.
I'm going to look into the tea
leaves here. Look what we saw.
Crystal ball.
Yeah.
What we know is Fulton
County District Attorney Connie
Willis wants to get this trial underway.
She's made it clear that she is
ready to go to trial as soon as August.
And, of course,
the Trump
team is happy
to let this take as long as possible.
And we have not heard from the judge.
It's up to him
when he wants to set this trial date.
He's been a little bit skeptical
about the notion
that Trump
and his 14 remaining co-defendants
should all go to trial together.
But he hasn't made any comments recently
about a potential trial date
or how he might want to split up
this bucket of remaining codefendant.
There's also speculation
out there, partly because of his
ruling on funding.
Well, it's being able to stay on the case
that we may
see a gag
order, a filing,
asking for a gag order on the D.A.
from the Trump team.
What are you hearing from sources
about that?
That's right.
My colleagues at Cohen and Jason
Morris and I are reporting out
that there have been some discussions
among defendants for these Trump allies,
and their attorneys are saying,
is it time for us
to go to the judge and say, you know,
you got a gag, funny witness.
You can't have her out here
making comments about this case.
She's appeared at a number of events.
She's suggested
that some of the scrutiny
that she's getting is racially motivated.
In his ruling,
Judge McAfee allowing
funny Willis to stay on the case,
he all but invited defense attorneys
to come to him and ask for a gag order.
He said it might be time to preclude
any kind of public comments.
Now, they still have
this appeal going on.
They're still trying to
get Willis disqualified
from the case, though.
A number of attorneys are kind of like,
you know, let's wait
and see if we can get her
kicked off entirely.
That would be our
our preferred outcome here.
But in the meantime,
this is something that
they're sort of discussing.
The other caveat here.
No, no defendants in this case
want this to boomerang back around.
They don't want a judge to say,
okay, fine,
Willis can't talk about the case,
but neither can Donald Trump.
Neither can Rudy Giuliani.
Neither can Georgia
GOP Chair David Shafer.
These are all people
who have been out here
talking about the case.
And finally with us on social media
and in interviews
That's a really,
really interesting point.
Sara, thank you so much for that.
I want to go now
to Kara Scannell in New York.
And I know, Carrie,
you have some new reporting
concerning the bond
that Trump paid in a separate case,
the fraud case there.
What have you learned?
Right.
This is the fraud case
involving the New York attorney
general's office.
And Trump
posted the $175 million
bond on Monday night.
Now, the New York attorney
general's office is saying
that they want more information
and they want more information
because the underwriter of that
bond night
specialty is based in California
and it's not regulated by New York.
And so they want to ensure that this
this bond will actually
can be backed
and supported by the underwriter.
Now, the head of that company, Don
Hankie, told my colleague Matt Egan
that Trump had posted
$175 million in cash as collateral.
But the new York attorney
general's office is saying,
because this company
is not regulated here,
they can't get a certificate
from the New York regulators ensuring
that they're financially sound.
So they want more information
from the bond underwriter
and from Trump
about what is backing this bond.
And they say that they want this
within ten days
or else the bond is not valid.
So again,
putting more pressure
on Trump to come up with this.
Now, I just spoke with a lawyer
who does a lot of these bond deals,
and he told me that,
you know,
this is an appropriate
step by the New York attorney
general's office
and the options that Trump
has is either
getting pairing up with another company
that is regulated in New York
that is allowed to do
these types of bonds in New York
or getting a court to agree to this.
So, you know, again,
this will be more filings.
But before Judge Arthur
Goren, who is overseeing this case,
but the AG's office now
challenging this bond
and challenging
whether or not
the company can support the bond
should they ultimately prevail
after this appeal.
Brianna for us.
Tara Scannell from New York,
thank you so much.
Let's bring in CNN
legal analyst and former
federal prosecutor Jennifer Rogers.
Jennifer, your reaction to this request
in New York and Letitia James, this move
this skepticism
that she apparently has about
the bond company and whether they
can financially back Trump
now?
Well, Letitia James
has been skeptical of Trump all along.
We've seen it
and it looks like she's just trying to do
what she can
to ensure
that if the attorney general's office
is when the appeal
and the judgment stays as it is
that they'll be able to collect.
Now, of course,
the amount of the bond is much less
than the amount of the judgment
that Judge and Warren found
was ill gotten gains.
So she still will have to go
after the Trump Organization
and the other defendants
in order to collect
the balance of that money.
But she wants to make sure
that at least
the first hundred
and 75 million is easy to get.
So it seems appropriate to me
and we'll see what steps need
to be taken to ensure
that that money
is there and available
for the people of the state of New York.
And Jen, Trump's
lawyer, Steve
Saito,
just reacted to the Georgia ruling.
He says the defense will continue
to evaluate our options
regarding the First Amendment challenges.
And the court's ruling made clear
the defendants were not foreclosed
from again raising the challenge,
which indeed they were not.
What do you think about this?
What other challenges could
be in the works
Well, this
First Amendment challenge is one
that Team
Trump has made in every single case.
The notion
that because he was the president
and because he's
a presidential candidate
and because he opens his mouth and words
come out,
everything that he says
should be protected
is something that they've been pressing
in all the cases.
And it's not really about the merits,
Brianna.
I mean,
there's no question
that evidence can be used, a speech
that is made by defendants
in the course of committing crimes.
This, to me
is just more of a delay tactic.
They're just trying to find ways
that they can appeal
and delay these proceedings.
So that's what this is all about.
I mean, you can't say
if Trump robbed a bank and walked in
and said, I'm running for president.
Let me tell you about how great I am.
And, by the way, stuffed
some bags full of money
because I'm robbing this bank.
There's no question
that you can put that speech
and even if it's sort of intertwined
with political speech.
So the merits are a no go.
This is just all about pushing
every avenue they possibly can
to delay these things
and possibly
to get some of these arguments
in front of the jury in some capacity.
The prosecutor's job
then will be to get
a very strong instruction
from the judge
about what
the limits of political speech are
and how criminal speech
is not protected by the First Amendment.
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
BREAKING🔥 Fani Willis DISQUALIFICATION Saga - FANI's Entire Team REMOVED🚨Trumps Motion of Appeal
🚨 Trump attorneys get career-ending news
'Extraordinary': Hear what happened in court as Trump tried to delay his criminal trial
The Trump trials: A former president faces justice
Trump hit with INSTANT bad news in NY court
Neal Katyal reveals why he 'strongly suspects' Trump will be convicted in hush money case