New York Court of Appeals (our highest state court) just dismissed, sua sponte (on its own motion), Former President Donald Trump's appeal of the intermediate appellate court's denial of relief from gag order entered by Justice Merchan in criminal case.
www.law360.com/articles/1849139/attachments/0
It's cool that you clarified to @mitchellepner.bsky.social that the "ugh" wasn't directed toward him.
But you've never issued a similar clarification toward me. Does this mean those "ugh" replies were, in fact, directed toward me?
If so, ugh!
Yeah, I believe it. I mostly wanted the original doc for sourcing purposes, because I argue with idiots a lot. (It’s here, but it’s just a cattle call PDF with the info from your screenshots in it www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decis...)
Not explained. I have no idea why Chief Judge Wilson and Judge Halligan recused.
In New York, our trial court is called the Supreme Court and those who preside are called "Justice [name]".
Our highest court is called the Court of Appeals and the 7 members are called "Judge [name]".
That is the end of his appeal of the gag order, as a trial matter.
There's an upcoming hearing on whether the gag order will continue post-trail.
Former President Trump's attorneys have said they'll argue on appeal the gag order denied him a fair trial.
I cannot imagine the last argument working.
I think the courts need to signal that they will protect witnesses and jury members...even after the trial is over. Otherwise, more people will be even more frightened to participate in the legal process.
I agree, although I believe that the gag order with regard to Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels stands in a different place. They have engaged in substantial publicity before and after the verdict. YMMV.
You make a decent point, and I have mixed feelings. I just worry that if one of them is assaulted or threatened after a Trump tirade it won't matter to future witnesses that they engaged in substantial publicity. I don't know how to balance that.
My growing concern since SCOTUS agreed to hear the immunity case (after refusing Jack Smith's request to hear it in a expedited manner) is that they aren't operating in good faith. Appeal doesn't need to make sense to seasoned lawyers, as long as there is a fig leaf that allows delay for Trump.
