Donald Trump's lawyers are pushing back against plans to broadcast his arraignment on live television, arguing that it would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and pose security risks. In a letter filed with New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant on Monday, the Trump team contends that allowing cameras and videographers into the courtroom would heighten concerns about potential security breaches.
The lawyers point to the fact that Secret Service-related security concerns are at play in this case, and suggest that any video or photography of the proceedings would only exacerbate these issues. They claim that this could lead to a heightened sense of tension and stress for both Trump and his team.
While some outlets have requested permission to broadcast the arraignment live on camera, including CNN, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has declined to comment directly on the matter. However, in their letter to Judge Merchant, prosecutors note that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law.
A similar request was made for the 2021 arraignment in a tax fraud case against Trump Organization and its CFO Allen Weisselberg. In that instance, the judge allowed a limited number of still photographs to be taken prior to proceedings commencing.
The matter will now rest with Judge Merchant, who is under pressure to balance competing demands from the media, the prosecution, and the defense.
The lawyers point to the fact that Secret Service-related security concerns are at play in this case, and suggest that any video or photography of the proceedings would only exacerbate these issues. They claim that this could lead to a heightened sense of tension and stress for both Trump and his team.
While some outlets have requested permission to broadcast the arraignment live on camera, including CNN, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has declined to comment directly on the matter. However, in their letter to Judge Merchant, prosecutors note that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law.
A similar request was made for the 2021 arraignment in a tax fraud case against Trump Organization and its CFO Allen Weisselberg. In that instance, the judge allowed a limited number of still photographs to be taken prior to proceedings commencing.
The matter will now rest with Judge Merchant, who is under pressure to balance competing demands from the media, the prosecution, and the defense.
. On one hand, I think it would be pretty intense for the whole world to see him get arraigned live 
. But at the same time, aren't we already living in a "circus-like atmosphere" with all the drama that comes with his... um, let's say "controversial" career 
? Maybe it would just add more fuel to the fire? And security risks are definitely a thing - what if someone gets hurt or causes a scene? 
On the other hand, isn't transparency and accountability kinda key in our whole justice system, even for high-profile cases like this? 
I guess only Judge Merchant knows for sure how to weigh all these factors... 
should be all about transparency, innit? anyway, whoever gets this one way is gonna make a million bucks 
i'm rooting for live broadcast 4 life!!!
... I think it's crazy that his lawyers are trying to block live coverage of a public trial. News at its core is meant to be transparent, you know? If we're gonna have a trial, it should be open to the people. The idea of creating a "circus-like atmosphere" just seems like an excuse to avoid accountability. And what's with the security risks claim? Can't they just take some basic precautions? 
... I mean, it would totally disrupt the whole process and create a massive spectacle that would overshadow the actual proceedings 
... but on the other hand, can you imagine how boring it would be to watch someone get arraigned without any drama or tension? 
It's like they're trying to suck all the excitement out of it. And security-wise, I'm all for being cautious, but come on, it's just a live TV broadcast... what's the worst that could happen? 
I think it's reasonable for Trump's team to be concerned about security risks. Remember that time with the Stormy Daniels incident? Yeah, let's not forget that 
. But at the same time, the public has a right to know what's going on, you feel? It's like my aunt always says, "a little bit of sunshine is good for everyone" 
.
. That seemed kinda chill, I guess. The lawyers are worried about tension and stress, but isn't that what happens in courtrooms all the time? 
It's all a bit of a balancing act for Judge Merchant, isn't it? 
Can't say I'm surprised Trump's team is pushing back hard... after all, they've got a lot to lose if there's even a hint of controversy 
.
] [GIF of a courtroom door slamming shut 
] 
]
]
... honestly, I'm all for keeping things calm & peaceful, maybe the judge can find some middle ground? 
meanwhile we got real issues in this world that need attention not some celebrity drama 
my guess is the prosecutors don't want Trump looking all suave and calm on camera, so they're trying to keep him under wraps 
.
. I mean, what's he got to hide? The guy's been all over the news for years, and now you're telling me we can't even see him get booked in court on live TV? Give me a break! It's like they think he's some kind of royal or something. And security risks? Come on, if there's that much risk, maybe Trump shouldn't be allowed to leave his house without a team of secret service agents and a black SUV 
.
they had this crazy Korean BBQ stand that served the most tender beef short ribs... anyway, back to Trump's arraignment, it's wild how lawyers are always trying to spin things in their favor 
?