🇳🇱
I am really mixed on this one: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-in-jail/
On the one hand seeing Trump in jail would please me greatly. On the other I'm left asking how a judge has the right to restrain free speech at all. saying someone should "rot in hell" outside of court and having that land you in jail seems like a huge violation.
@freemo The idea is that this isn't a judge restraining free speech as much as maintaining order in his court, including the parts of court proceedings that happen outside the literal courtroom.
If a person was in the courtroom during the trial and wouldn't sit down and shut up when it wasn't their turn to speak, the judge could respond to that, right? It wouldn't be seen as a free speech violation, but rather just the judge giving others their chance to do their jobs?
Same thing here.
It wouldn't be punishment over speech--it would be jailing as a way to prevent interference with the court proceedings.
@volkris Sure but a judges ruleings need to be in line witht he constitution. They do have power outside the courtroom butnot when the exercise of that power is a violation of 1A.
@freemo right, and there wouldn't be any violation of 1A since the judge would be merely ensuring an orderly trial, no different from preventing someone from making a disturbance when someone is being questioned on the stand.
To put it a different way, it's not a restriction on speech but on the ability to interfere with the orderly judicial process.
The judge wouldn't at all be punishing someone for speech. The judge would be merely preventing someone from interfering with the goings on in court.
@freemo Yeah, so the judge oversees the entire trial, including everything from discovery motions through depositions that happen outside the courtroom.
If you think the behavior might have been managed by the judge inside the actual courtroom then it also applies outside the courtroom.
Of course, a judge can't go overboard and address behavior that has nothing to do with the trial, but that's why they have the appeals process to check the power of the judge to address stuff outside of their trial jurisdiction.
Here it sounds like Trump's been losing, though, with other courts agreeing that yes, these judgments were properly working to make sure the trial functions smoothly.