Donald Trump's Lawyer Made One Big Courtroom Mistake

Donald Trump's lawyer made a mistake by speaking over judges during his gag order appeal, an attorney has said.

In October, Judge Tanya Chutkan entered a gag order against the former president in his federal election interference case, preventing him from criticizing potential trial witnesses and others involved in the case on social media after he made a number of comments, including calling Special Counsel Jack Smith, who brought the charges against him, a "deranged lunatic" and a "thug."

The gag order allowed him instead to only discuss the case, which is one of two in which the Republican is accused of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election, charges he has denied, in general terms. Trump has denied any wrongdoing repeatedly and framed the case as part of a "witch hunt" against him.

Trump appealed the gag order to the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, arguing the order unconstitutionally infringed on his right to free speech while he campaigns to be re-elected as president next year. The order was paused while he appealed.

During Monday's hearing, in which no decision was made, Trump's lawyer John Sauer argued that prosecutors had not provided enough evidence to warrant a gag order, for instance by showing Trump's statements directly led to threats to witnesses.

"The order is unprecedented, and it sets a terrible precedent on future restrictions on core political speech," Sauer said.

Writing on Substack, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance said he also interrupted the judges, all Democratic nominees, Bradley Garcia, Patricia Millet and Cornelia Pillard, on several occasions, calling it "a bad look... that is often a prelude to disaster."

Newsweek contacted Sauer by email to comment on this story.

She wrote: "As a young appellate lawyer, one of the first things I was taught was to never speak over a judge. If a judge interrupted with a question, you stopped, listened, and answered. Respectfully. I passed that wisdom on to all of the new lawyers in my appellate division when I became the chief. It serves well.

"We call these proceedings 'argument' because they are meant to fully air the positions the parties are taking, their relative merits, and their flaws—not because the lawyers are arguing with the judges. But we saw a fair bit of that today, with Trump's lawyer often trying to continue speaking or speak over a judge who injected a question. That's a bad look for an appellate lawyer, and an approach that is often a prelude to disaster."

It is not clear when the court will issue a ruling on the case, but according to multiple reports, judges signaled with their statements that they may narrow the scope of the order while keeping it in place. If the judges rule against Trump, he can appeal the gag order to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Trump's election interference case is set to go to trial in Washington in March 2024. He is also facing a criminal trial in Georgia for alleged interference in the 2020 election and a criminal trial in New York over alleged hush money payments to the adult film star, Stormy Daniels.

Newsweek also contacted representatives for Trump by email to comment on this story.