Judge Merchan Threatens Trump Lawyers With Criminal Contempt

Criminal defendant Donald Trump woke up this morning thinking it would be a great strategic move to attack the judge's daughter before his criminal trial in New York on April 15. Judge Juan Merchan let Trump know right away that his tolerance for foolishness is at an end.

This morning, Merchan issued a pretrial order ripping Trump's legal team for repeated efforts to stall and postpone the trial. He followed that up later in the day by hitting Trump with a gag order, which prohibits him from disparaging any court personnel or their family members. 

In the pretrial order, Merchan began by stating that "Defendant has repeatedly tried to delay the start of the trial." He noted that many pretrial motions have already been filed by Trump's legal team, and all of them were decided promptly on February 15, 2024. Merchan then scolded them for filing a new motion, less than three weeks before trial and after the deadlines, asserting presidential immunity, and issued an Order the following day that they were not to file any additional motions without first seeking permission of the court.

The Trump legal team responded to that by asserting the Order violated the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Merchan said this response was contrary to both the rules and NY case law, and denied Trump's assertions that his right to due process and fair trial were violated. The Judge then issued a final warning to Trump's lawyers, taking the extraordinary step of threatening criminal contempt for another violation:

"This Court advises counsel that it expects and welcome zealous advocacy and creative lawyering. However, the Court also expects those advocates to demonstrate the proper respect and decorum that is owed to the courts and its judicial officers and to never forget that they are officers of the court. As such, counsel is expected to follow this Court’s orders. As such, “a court of record has power to punish for a criminal contempt, a person guilty of . . . [w]illful disobedience to its lawful mandate.” This Court emphasizes that it hopes for and fully expects zealous advocacy from counsel as well as spirited contribution from witnesses and parties alike. Nonetheless, the Court expects that the line between zealous advocacy and willful disregard of its orders will not be crossed."

You can read the full order here.