Trump Team Pushes Back Against Media's Request to Broadcast Arraignment; Manhattan DA's Office Weighs In.
Lawyers for former President Donald Trump are fighting back against a request by media outlets to broadcast his upcoming arraignment in New York. The attorneys argue that allowing cameras and videography at the proceeding would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise unique security concerns, citing the Secret Service-related risks associated with Mr. Trump's presence.
In a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant, the Trump team claimed that any video or photography of the arraignment would only heighten these serious concerns. They emphasized that the defendant is entitled to presume innocence and suggested that a live broadcast could compromise his rights. The lawyers also pointed out that similar requests had been made for Mr. Trump's previous high-profile arraignments, including in 2021.
In response, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has stated that it will defer to the judge's discretion on how to manage the proceedings, but noted that excluding or restricting videography and photography could be a defensible exercise of the court's authority to maintain order and protect all parties involved. Notably, the prosecutors acknowledged that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes.
This move comes as CNN, among other media outlets, has requested access for camera crews to cover Mr. Trump's arraignment. The incident highlights the ongoing tension between the media and those who seek to restrict their coverage of high-profile events like this one.
Lawyers for former President Donald Trump are fighting back against a request by media outlets to broadcast his upcoming arraignment in New York. The attorneys argue that allowing cameras and videography at the proceeding would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise unique security concerns, citing the Secret Service-related risks associated with Mr. Trump's presence.
In a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant, the Trump team claimed that any video or photography of the arraignment would only heighten these serious concerns. They emphasized that the defendant is entitled to presume innocence and suggested that a live broadcast could compromise his rights. The lawyers also pointed out that similar requests had been made for Mr. Trump's previous high-profile arraignments, including in 2021.
In response, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has stated that it will defer to the judge's discretion on how to manage the proceedings, but noted that excluding or restricting videography and photography could be a defensible exercise of the court's authority to maintain order and protect all parties involved. Notably, the prosecutors acknowledged that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes.
This move comes as CNN, among other media outlets, has requested access for camera crews to cover Mr. Trump's arraignment. The incident highlights the ongoing tension between the media and those who seek to restrict their coverage of high-profile events like this one.
. I mean, it's a live arraignment – it's not like they're allowing some crazy circus to come in and disrupt the proceedings. The media has every right to be there, and if anyone's going to get affected by security concerns, it should be the court itself, not the public interest 
. I also don't buy that Trump's just trying to hide something – he's been under scrutiny for years, so this is about control, plain and simple 
. The fact that prosecutors are actually saying it could be a legitimate reason to restrict coverage makes me think they're trying to cover up something 
.
... I mean, I get it that security is a thing, but come on! It's an arraignment, not a presidential inauguration 
. Can't we just have some transparency here? Like, what's the big deal if there are cameras and whatnot? It's not like he's gonna make any deals with himself or something... and btw, 2021 was like, ages ago 
. Anyway, I guess it's all about weighing the risks and stuff. I hope the judge makes a fair decision tho 
.
! anyway, i feel bad for the man, but come on, it's not like he's gonna get off scot-free... or should i say, scot-freed in NY 
. seriously though, who needs cameras and videography at an arraignment? sounds like trump's team is just trying to avoid getting roasted by the paparazzi 
. but for real, shouldn't the man be able to show his face and own up to whatever he did? or am i just being too dramatic 
?
). I mean, come on, Donald, you're a public figure, you've been in the spotlight for DECADES now! You can handle a little bit of scrutiny from the media 
. I'm not buying it, though. The DA's office seems pretty reasonable in saying that they'll defer to the judge's discretion, but still wanting to make sure that their rights as a public entity are protected 
.
. They're still trying to play the victim card and claim that they can't handle the pressure of being in court... like, hello, you've been in more high-stakes situations than most people have hot meals 
. can't blame them for wanting to protect his ego, but it's kinda rich that they're worried about the Secret Service when we've had like, actual terrorists showing up to Trump's rallies 
.
. But at the same time, I can kinda see where they're coming from - security would be a major concern, especially with the Secret Service involved 
. Maybe the DA's office should just stick to their guns and let the judge decide? I mean, it's not like Trump hasn't been in some hot water before... this is kinda just more of the same, right? 
.
The DA's office is being totally reasonable by saying the judge gets to decide how things go down, but I guess it's too much to ask that Trump's lawyers would put the interests of justice and transparency above all else... Nope, let's keep this whole thing behind closed doors for once 
It feels like everything is about control and power in this situation... not to mention the absurdity of having no clear rules against cameras at an arraignment - what's next, secret society meetings? 
. It's like, what if things get out of hand during the live broadcast? 
Would that really compromise Trump's rights or would it just make him look guilty by association? 
.
.
. hope the judge makes a fair call 
.