February 19, 2026 02:27 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
AI takes centre stage as Modi meets Google CEO Sundar Pichai in Delhi | G7 Spotlight: Emmanuel Macron invites Narendra Modi for 2026 Summit | AI Summit embarrassment! Galgotias University asked to vacate stall after ‘own robot’ exposed as China’s Unitree Go2 | Actor Rajpal Yadav granted interim bail in ₹9-crore cheque bounce case | Learn AI or become redundant: Microsoft India President issues stark message | India’s wholesale inflation rises to 1.81% in January as manufacturing prices surge | 'India at forefront of AI revolution': PM Modi welcomes world leaders to Delhi summit | Rs 5,000 to women ahead of Tamil Nadu polls! Vijay slams Stalin, says: ‘take the money, blow the whistle’ | Modi congratulates Tarique Rahman as BNP clinches majority in Bangladesh polls | Bangladesh Polls: Tarique Rahman-led BNP secures 'absolute majority' with 151 seats in historic comeback
Donald Trump
Photo courtesy: Wallpaper cave

US Court of Appeals begins hearing into Donald Trump gag order

| @indiablooms | Nov 21, 2023, at 05:40 am

Washington/IBNS/UNI: The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit began a hearing on Monday into former US President Donald Trump’s challenge against a gag order in his criminal case regarding his alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the case, issued the gag order last month after the government had shown that Trump’s public attacks on individuals, including those related to the case, had led to them being threatened and harassed.

Judge Patricia Millet, one of the three judges on the panel hearing the appeal, sharply challenged the merit of the Trump team’s proposed legal test of “clear and present danger” as a basis for a gag order instead.

She disputed whether it presented a different standard for trial participants compared to outsiders; moreover, criminal law would likely already cover actions that involved clear and present danger.

Millet also noted that the Supreme Court had ruled that “clear and present danger” was not a mechanical formulation, but a balancing test.

In Trump’s case, it would mean striking a balance between political campaign speech and the integrity of the criminal trial, but in Millett’s view, his team was not able to provide anything other than a criminal law violation to satisfy their proposed test.

The court adjourned the case until November 30.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.