They’ve petitioned the judge presiding over the matter to prevent Trump from making public statements that could potentially endanger law enforcement officers involved in the prosecution.
This move comes in response to Trump’s recent false claim, where he suggested that FBI agents who searched his Mar-a-Lago estate in August 2022 were authorized to use lethal force against him and his family. However, it was clarified in court documents that the FBI followed standard protocols during the search, which strictly prohibit the use of deadly force unless there’s an immediate threat of serious harm to the officers or others. Importantly, the search was conducted in coordination with the Secret Service while Trump and his family were away, and no force was used.
Prosecutors argue that such baseless statements by Trump could potentially put law enforcement officers at risk and undermine the integrity of the prosecution process. Trump’s defense team has objected to this motion, and Trump himself has yet to respond to these developments.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has condemned Trump’s claims as “extremely dangerous,” emphasizing that the use-of-force policy cited is standard practice and has been employed even in searches involving other high-profile figures, like President Joe Biden.
The charges against Trump include allegations of unlawfully retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago property and obstructing the FBI’s attempts to retrieve them after he left office. Trump has maintained his innocence, pleading not guilty to the numerous felony counts he faces.
This case is one of four criminal proceedings Trump is entangled in as he pursues a return to the White House. However, it remains uncertain whether any of these cases will conclude before the upcoming election. Trump has already faced restrictions on his speech in other cases, including fines and the threat of jail time for violating a gag order in a New York prosecution related to hush money payments. Additionally, a gag order is in place in his federal criminal case in Washington, limiting his public commentary on certain aspects of the proceedings.