Member
House Republicans Denounce Corrupt New York DA’s Proposed Gag Order on Trump Case
Charlie Kirk Staff
04/05/2023
Two prominent Republican lawmakers, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY), have spoken out against the proposed gag order by District Attorney Alvin Bragg on former President Donald Trump.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Jordan and Comer expressed their concerns about the potential restriction on Trump’s ability to discuss the accusations against him and how he has been treated by New York’s justice system.
They called the proposed gag order “unconstitutional” and accused Bragg of politically weaponizing the justice system in New York.
“To put any restrictions on the ability of President Trump to discuss his mistreatment at the hands of this politically motivated prosecutor would only further demonstrate the weaponization of the New York justice system,” the statement read. “To even contemplate stifling the speech of the former commander in chief and current candidate for President is at odds with everything America stands for.”
The lawmakers argued that such a move would be a violation of Trump’s right to free speech, which is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Trump faces 34 charges in New York State, and the exact charges against him remain unknown until the indictment is unsealed.
Meanwhile, demonstrators appeared outside of the Manhattan courthouse, including Human Events’s Jack Posobiec, who urged those around him not to give up on the United States. “They want us to go home… they want us to quit. I can’t quit. I’m not going to quit because I’m not going to let the United States of America go down like that,” Posobiec said.
.@JackPosobiec in front of the Manhattan Courthouse: “They can gag Donald Trump, but they can’t gag all of us!”#TrumpIndicment
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) April 4, 2023
Bragg’s reported proposal for a gag order would prevent Trump from discussing his case in the media or in public forums. However, Jordan and Comer argue that such a move would be a clear violation of the First Amendment, and they vow to continue to defend Trump’s right to free speech.
