Judge Napolitano: Trump Jan. 6 Verdict Likely Before November '24 Election

Judge Napolitano: Trump Jan. 6 Verdict Likely Before November '24 Election

Former New Jersey Superior Court Judge Andrew Napolitano told Newsmax on Monday that a verdict in the Jan. 6 case against former President Donald Trump is likely to be reached before next year’s presidential election.

Trump, currently the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential election, is facing charges related to an alleged plot to overturn the 2020 election results.

During an interview on “Wake Up America” with host Rob Finnerty, who pointed out Democrats’ desire for a guilty verdict before the election, Napolitano was asked if he anticipates one in any of the four criminal trials involving Trump before November 5, 2024.

“Yes, the D.C. case is scheduled for March, just four months from now, and that [D.C. appeals] court just doesn’t interfere with the trial judge’s management of her case,” Napolitano said. “So that’s the Jan. 6 case in federal court, Judge Tanya Chutkan.”

When he was asked if he thought Trump would wind up behind bars, Napolitano said: “He could, but I don’t think he will.”

Napolitano’s remarks on Newsmax come on a day expected to involve decisions on gag orders in the D.C. case and in the civil fraud case in New York. Napolitano said he believes that Trump will likely receive a split decision.

“Two events that could have a profound effect on Donald Trump’s ability to speak his mind on the prosecutions, slash persecutions, against him,” Napolitano said. “In New York, this is the civil fraud case in Manhattan, the trial judge imposed a gag order prohibiting the former president from criticizing the trial judge’s staff and from discussing the testimony of the witnesses in the case publicly. When Trump’s lawyers appealed this, an appellate division judge immediately stopped, stayed, the effect of the gag order.

“Today [Monday] is the full appeal. That is the oral argument on the appeal before four appellate division judges. I expect that gag order not to be affirmed because the purpose of gag orders is to protect jurors and witnesses, and the witnesses have finished just about finished testifying in the Trump case. The only witnesses remaining are his own, and there are no jurors,” he added.

The former judge said he expects the gag order to be reinstated in D.C.

“There, I expect the gag order to be upheld simply because there is a tradition in federal court for appellate judges not to interfere with trial judges in the management of the trial,” he said. “They may narrow the gag order a little bit in D.C., but I think they’re going to uphold it.”

He was then asked if he believes the gag orders have hurt Trump’s ability to campaign for president.

“Well, knowing him, I know he wants to be unbridled, or he wants to be able to say whatever is on his mind, but I think he’s done a very good job, a very disciplined job of toeing the line … of coming right up to the line of what these gag orders will allow,” he said.

“My own view is that gag orders are unconstitutional. I never imposed one when I was on the bench, but that is not the view of most judges. Most judges believe that they can suppress the speech of a litigant,” he added.


Join the Newsletter