Skip to main content
Defend Our Country Digest

Defend Our Country Digest — October 19, 2023

By October 19, 2023No Comments

Driving the Day

Must Read Stories

Judge imposes gag order on Trump in federal election case, but questions remain about the details of implementation

  • New York Times: Gag Order on Trump in Election Case Leaves More Hard Questions: “It took Judge Tanya S. Chutkan three rounds of written filings over the last six weeks and more than two hours of courtroom arguments this week to sort through the issues surrounding the gag order she imposed on former President Donald J. Trump. And that may have been the easy part. Judge Chutkan released the formal written order on Tuesday. She detailed in three brief pages how Mr. Trump has now been barred from making public comments targeting the members of her court staff, the special counsel Jack Smith and any members of his staff, as well as “any reasonably foreseeable witnesses” in the sprawling federal criminal case in which the former president stands accused of seeking to overturn the 2020 election.”
  • PBS: Trump is appealing a partial gag order imposed on him in his 2020 election interference case: “Former President Donald Trump is appealing a narrow gag order that bars him from making statements attacking prosecutors, potential witnesses and court staff in his election interference case in Washington, according to court documents filed Tuesday. Trump’s lawyers said in court papers that they will challenge an order from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan that restricts Trump’s public statements about the case accusing him of scheming to subvert the results of the 2020 election. Special counsel Jack Smith’s team sought the order against the Republican 2024 presidential front-runner over a litany of verbal attacks from him on likely witnesses and others. Prosecutors say Trump’s incendiary rhetoric is designed to undermine the public’s confidence in the judicial process and taint the jury pool.”
  • Washington Post: D.C. judge formally issues gag order against Trump. Here’s what to know: “U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a limited gag order against Donald Trump that prohibits the former president from disparaging prosecutors, witnesses and court personnel involved in his upcoming election-obstruction trial in federal court in Washington, D.C. Chutkan published the written version of her order on Tuesday — a day after she held a hearing on the matter and said she would impose the gag. A few hours later, Trump and his lawyers filed a notice saying they intended to appeal the ruling to the federal appeals court in D.C. Trump has said the order violates his First Amendment rights as he is running for president.”
  • Politico: Trump’s new gag order poses puzzles with no easy answers: “U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan’s gag order against Donald Trump is the first major consequence of his life as a criminal defendant. But in some ways, the order raises more questions than it answers — including how Chutkan intends to enforce her restrictions on a politician who never stops talking. The veteran Obama-appointed jurist ruled Monday that Trump’s pretrial attacks on potential witnesses and others threatened the integrity of the upcoming trial on charges stemming from Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election. She barred Trump from continuing to publicly berate special counsel Jack Smith and his team, court staff, or any ‘reasonably foreseeable witness.’ Chutkan followed up with a three-page order on Tuesday that spelled out her ruling in writing. But it left many details murky — and so far, Trump has shown no signs of piping down. His legal team also filed an immediate appeal.”

Federal prosecutors appeal sentences of Proud Boys in Jan. 6 Capitol riot cases

  • Washington Post: U.S. to appeal sentences of five Proud Boys in Jan. 6 Capitol riot case: “The government filed notice Monday that it was appealing the sentences of the five members of the far-right Proud Boys group convicted in the Jan. 6 attack, the second such unusual notice by federal prosecutors after a similar filing in July indicating they would challenge the punishments handed down to five members of the Oath Keepers for their role in the Capitol riot. In both cases, the prosecutors were not required to file any explanation for their initial notices, but both cases could reflect government dissatisfaction with the length of the sentences, even though the Proud Boys’ former leader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio received the longest sentence yet imposed for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and three other members received more than 15 years in prison.”
  • CBS: Prosecutors appeal length of sentence for Philadelphia Proud Boys leader Zachary Rehl: “Federal prosecutors are appealing the sentences issued for Philadelphia Proud Boys leader Zachary Rehl, national leader Enrique Tarrio and two other Proud Boys convicted of seditious conspiracy in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, saying a federal judge in Washington issued punishments significantly shorter than what prosecutors recommended, court filings show. U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly sentenced Tarrio and three lieutenants to prison terms ranging from 15 to 22 years after a jury convicted them in May of plotting to stop the peaceful transfer of presidential power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden after the 2020 presidential election. Prosecutors had recommended a 30-year sentence for Rehl. He was sentenced in August to 15 years.”

Justice Barrett supports a new ethics code for Supreme Court

  • New York Times: Justice Barrett Calls for Supreme Court to Adopt an Ethics Code: “Justice Amy Coney Barrett said on Monday that she favored an ethics code for the Supreme Court, joining the growing chorus of justices who have publicly backed adopting such rules. ‘It would be a good idea for us to do it, particularly so that we can communicate to the public exactly what it is that we are doing in a clearer way,’ she said during a wide-ranging conversation at the University of Minnesota Law School with Robert Stein, a longtime law professor and the former chief operating officer of the American Bar Association.”
  • The Guardian: Amy Coney Barrett calls ethics code for scandal-hit supreme court ‘a good idea’: “The conservative supreme court justice Amy Coney Barrett has said she and her colleagues should be subject to a code of ethics, following a series of scandals that have dented public confidence in the nation’s highest bench. Accusations of malfeasance and corruption have swirled around two associate justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, for months, prompting calls from legal watchdogs and others for their resignation, or for Chief Justice John Roberts to force their recusal from certain cases.”

In The States

NORTH CAROLINA: Two new lawsuits challenge recent GOP-backed changes to voting laws

  • Associated Press: North Carolina’s governor sues lawmakers for a measure that eliminates his elections board authority: “North Carolina Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper sued state Republican lawmakers on Tuesday over a measure that eliminates his authority to pick elections board members, while voting rights groups filed yet another lawsuit challenging provisions of a law that they contend will discourage young people from voting. Both measures became law last week, when the GOP-controlled General Assembly overrode Cooper’s vetoes of them. The governor’s lawsuit, filed in state court against House Speaker Tim Moore, Senate leader Phil Berger and the state, challenges a measure that would transfer his power over the elections board to legislative leaders. Cooper said the board changes, which would take effect Jan. 1, run counter to the state constitution and state Supreme Court rulings in the 2010s that demand a governor have control over executive agencies to carry out laws. State voters also rejected a 2018 referendum that would have given lawmakers more say over the composition of the State Board of Elections.”
  • NC Newsline: Third federal lawsuit filed over North Carolina’s new voting law: “Lawyers with the Southern Coalition for Social Justice filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging a new North Carolina elections law, saying it discriminates against young voters. This is the third lawsuit challenging the multi-faceted law that, among other things, eliminates the three-day grace period for mail-in ballot returns and allows partisan observers to move more freely around polling locations. Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, vetoed Senate Bill 747, but the legislature overrode his veto last week with party line votes in the House and Senate. Republicans hold veto-proof majorities in both chambers. Republicans said the law helps boost confidence in elections. The Southern Coalition for Social Justice is representing Democracy North Carolina, the North Carolina Black Alliance, and the League of Women Voters of North Carolina in their lawsuit challenging one of the law’s provisions. The law sets out new requirements for verifying addresses of people who use same-day registration. Same-day registration allows people during early voting periods to register and vote all in one trip to the polls.”
  • WRAL: Republican leaders propose new NC congressional districts that could strengthen GOP’s power: “North Carolina Republican lawmakers unveiled two potential new congressional district maps Tuesday that, if either is approved, would likely spell political doom in next year’s elections for multiple Democrats who represent North Carolina in the U.S. House of Representatives. The map could still change. There will be committee meetings at the legislature to debate the districts starting Thursday. But any changes are more likely to be minor tweaks than wholesale re-draws. North Carolina’s 14-seat congressional delegation currently consists of seven Democrats and seven Republicans. If it stands as drawn, the new proposed congressional map would be expected to flip multiple U.S. House districts from blue to red in the 2024 elections — a boost to national Republicans, who control a shaky majority of just a few seats in the House, as illustrated by recent unsuccessful attempts by Republican members of Congress to pick a permanent Speaker of the House. One of the new maps would give Republicans an all-but-certain 11-3 advantage in future elections, while the other would likely be a 10-4 or 11-3 split.”

WISCONSIN: Republican state legislators admit that their move to remove the state’s top election official was “symbolic,” then swiftly vote to remove Democratic nominee from the Wisconsin Elections Commission

  • Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Republican lawmakers fire second top election official in battleground Wisconsin: “Wisconsin Republican lawmakers on Tuesday voted to fire a second top election official, the latest move by the GOP-controlled Legislature to overhaul the state’s election system that has been under fire since former President Donald Trump launched a baseless campaign to sow distrust in his reelection loss in 2020. Twenty-one Republican senators voted to reject Democratic Gov. Tony Evers’ appointee to the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission, removing him from his position on the panel that provides guidance to clerks throughout the state on how to run elections. Former Milwaukee County Clerk Joseph Czarnezki was rejected after he joined Democratic commissioners in abstaining from a vote to reappoint Wisconsin Elections Commission administrator Meagan Wolfe in an effort to keep Wolfe in her job amid an effort by Senate Republicans to remove her over the 2020 election.”
  • Associated Press: Wisconsin Republicans admit vote to fire elections chief had no legal effect: “Republican Wisconsin lawmakers working to oust the state’s nonpartisan top elections official have admitted that a state Senate vote to fire her last month has no legal effect. In a change of course from recent calls to impeach Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe, leaders of the GOP-controlled Legislature said in court documents filed Friday that the vote on Sept. 14 to fire her ‘was symbolic and meant to signal disapproval of Administrator Wolfe’s performance.’ Wolfe has been lawfully holding over in office since her term expired on July 1, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, Senate President Chris Kapenga and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos admitted.”

ARIZONA: Ninth Circuit court dismisses Kari Lake and Mark Finchem’s election fraud claims

  • AZ Central: Kari Lake, Mark Finchem lose federal appeal in effort to ban voting machines in Arizona: “Former GOP candidates for statewide office Kari Lake and Mark Finchem lost their federal appeal in their effort to ban voting machines and will still have to pay a six-figure sanction in the case. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals noted in a 12-page ruling on Monday that ’none’ of Finchem’s and Lake’s allegations support the idea that future elections could be marred because of electronic ballot-tabulation machines. They only presented ‘conjectural’ claims that relied on a series of hypothetical circumstances ‘that have never occurred in Arizona’ but which needed to take place if the court was to find any harm to the plaintiffs, the ruling states. Finchem and Lake are no longer candidates for the 2022 election and have no standing to sue, the appeals court ruled, nor did they present any evidence they had been harmed by the county’s actions in using voting machines.”

What Experts Are Saying

NBC reporter Ryan Reilly, on extremism, in a Salon interview: “People have a First Amendment right to believe any sort of crazy conspiracy that they want to. But that leaves us in a situation where we’re vulnerable to these sort of attacks, because you have so many people who can easily justify violent reactions to disinformation.”

Adam Klasfeld, senior legal reporter at the Messenger, on X (Twitter): “Trump’s formal gag order is out in D.C., and its explicit terms show it’s significantly narrower than the former president indicated. Judge Chutkan says the issue is Trump’s ’grave threats’ to the integrity of the case — not his speech.”

Dennis Aftergut and Frederick Baron, on the gag order, for Slate: “The order is elegant. She grounded the order in long-standing Supreme Court law that a trial court has a duty to ‘protect [its] processes from prejudicial outside interferences’ and that ‘[t]he First Amendment does not override that obligation.’ Then, she carefully focused on conduct by Trump that could reasonably be expected to increase the risk of violence to anyone in his trial process—witnesses, prosecutors, and court staff. That alone raises the guardrail against appellate reversal on First Amendment grounds, even by this Supreme Court.”

Daniel Griffith, senior director of policy at Secure Democracy USA in Slate article: “Looking back at the energy in 2021, after the election—it broadly has subsided. But there is some vocal shrinking minority of folks who are throwing a lot of energy at this stuff still. In pretty much every state, you have at least a couple legislators who will entertain their ideas and introduce bills. I don’t think it’s going away.”

Rachel Selzer, on the Independent State Legislature Theory, for Democracy Docket: “While the desired anti-democratic ends of Republican legislators in Arizona, Michigan and North Carolina are all distinct, their ISL-theory-rooted arguments — both past and present — coalesce around a shared misreading of the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause and a blatant disregard for their own state constitutional requirements.”

Headlines

Extremism

Newsweek: MAGA Divides Grow as Israel War Intensifies

Mediaite: MAGA Rally Crowd Roars As Trump Floats Kicking Biden Officials Out Of The Country

Trump investigations

NBC: Trump attends N.Y. fraud trial despite Michael Cohen’s absence

The Hill: Trump to be questioned in Strzok, Page FBI employee lawsuits

11 Alive: Fulton judge won’t toss Powell, Chesebro charges out

Raw Story: Fani Willis reveals the ‘craziest’ attack Trump has launched since his indictment

January 6 and the 2020 Elections

The Atlantic: Five Reasons the FBI Failed to Prepare for January 6

New York Times: Woman Who Used Bullhorn to Rally Rioters on Jan. 6 Gets Nearly 5 Years

Opinion

New York Times: The Debate Over How Dangerous Trump Is Rages On

USA Today: After a neighbor put up a KKK flag, she lobbied for new law. Lawmakers stalled it

In the States

KING 5: Election skeptics try new strategy targeting voter registrations in Washington

Associated Press: Minnesota leaders to fight court ruling that restoring voting rights for felons was unconstitutional

CBS Los Angeles: Santa Ana considers motion to grant non-citizens the right to vote