A New York Judge Faces Off Against Trump's Lawyers Over Arraignment Coverage
In a highly publicized dispute, lawyers for former President Donald Trump told a New York judge on Monday that they oppose media outlets' requests to broadcast Trump's arraignment on Tuesday. The request, which includes CNN, was denied by the Trump team, citing concerns about creating a "circus-like atmosphere," raising unique security risks, and undermining the defendant's presumption of innocence.
Trump's attorneys argued that any video or photography of the proceedings would exacerbate these concerns, particularly in light of potential Secret Service-related issues. The lawyers emphasized that the media request was not only an invasion of the defendant's rights but also a disruption to the proceedings themselves.
The Manhattan District Attorney's office has also expressed reservations about broadcasting the arraignment, deferring to the judge to decide how best to manage the courtroom. However, they noted that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law.
In contrast, a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was approved in 2021 for Trump's tax fraud trial. In that instance, the judge allowed a limited number of still photographs to be taken prior to the commencement of proceedings.
The dispute highlights the delicate balance between allowing public access to court proceedings and ensuring the safety and dignity of all parties involved. With Tuesday's arraignment looming, it remains to be seen how the judge will ultimately rule on the media requests.
In a highly publicized dispute, lawyers for former President Donald Trump told a New York judge on Monday that they oppose media outlets' requests to broadcast Trump's arraignment on Tuesday. The request, which includes CNN, was denied by the Trump team, citing concerns about creating a "circus-like atmosphere," raising unique security risks, and undermining the defendant's presumption of innocence.
Trump's attorneys argued that any video or photography of the proceedings would exacerbate these concerns, particularly in light of potential Secret Service-related issues. The lawyers emphasized that the media request was not only an invasion of the defendant's rights but also a disruption to the proceedings themselves.
The Manhattan District Attorney's office has also expressed reservations about broadcasting the arraignment, deferring to the judge to decide how best to manage the courtroom. However, they noted that there is no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law.
In contrast, a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was approved in 2021 for Trump's tax fraud trial. In that instance, the judge allowed a limited number of still photographs to be taken prior to the commencement of proceedings.
The dispute highlights the delicate balance between allowing public access to court proceedings and ensuring the safety and dignity of all parties involved. With Tuesday's arraignment looming, it remains to be seen how the judge will ultimately rule on the media requests.
idk why they're makin' such a big deal about this... if we want 2 know what's goin down in court, shouldn't we just get 2 see or hear it? 
seems like the judge is stuck in between lettin all the cameras roll and keepin the drama to minumum 
can't even make up their mind lol... maybe it's just a good idea 2 let the public decide what's important 
. Can u imagine if a student's trial was covered live like that? It would be super stressful for everyone involved. And I get why the lawyers are trying to prevent it, but at the same time it's kinda public interest thingy 
. Maybe he can find a compromise like they did with Trump's tax trial 
. Whatever happens, I hope it all goes smoothly on tuesday 
. And what's with the "circus-like atmosphere" thing? Is that really going to make a difference? I think the public has a right to know what's going on in a court of law, you feel? 
and what about the publics right to know? shouldn't we get a glimpse of whats going on in that courtroom? 
! like what even is a circus-like atmosphere tho? seems like trump team just wants to control the narrative and keep people from watching... and i get why the manhattan da's office might be worried about security risks too, but shouldn't we have access to our public officials doing time? 
. I get why Trump's team wants to limit the coverage, but at the same time, I think it's kinda weird that they're not wanting anyone to see their guy getting arraigned. Like, isn't that what we have courts for? And what about the public's right to know? 
It just seems like an excuse to keep the public out. I'm rooting for CNN and the other outlets to push through on this one 
when rich folks try to control what we see in courtrooms... meanwhile, us regular people just wanna know if our taxes are getting the job done 
or not? why do Trump's lawyers think they're above transparency? 
and btw, shouldn't we have some accountability from those in power? 
. I'm low-key hoping for a court TV special – just imagine the ratings 
! But on the other hand, isn't that what we're paying our taxes for - to see the justice system in action? 
but isn't that kinda weird considering all the drama he's been involved in? 
anyway, stats show that 90% of people think courts should allow some level of media coverage 
here's a chart showing the number of trials interrupted by security concerns: 
