**Trump's Arraignment: Media Outlets Face Backlash Over Live Broadcast Request**
Lawyers representing former President Donald Trump told a New York judge on Monday that they oppose the request by media outlets to broadcast Trump's arraignment in court. The lawyers argued that granting live camera access would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise unique security concerns, putting the defendant at risk.
In a letter sent to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant, Trump's attorneys claimed that allowing video or photography of the proceedings would only heighten the already extraordinary security concerns related to Secret Service protection. The team emphasized that they are required by court rules to take into account potential security concerns and believe that live broadcasting would exacerbate these issues.
The request was made by various media outlets, including CNN, in an effort to provide live coverage of the arraignment on Tuesday. However, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has also expressed reservations about granting camera access, citing concerns over avoiding potential prejudice to the defendant, maintaining order, and ensuring public safety.
Despite these objections, there appears to be no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment in New York state law or case precedent. However, prosecutors did note that a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was denied in 2021 for Trump's tax fraud case, with the judge allowing only a limited number of still photographs to be taken before proceedings began.
The outcome of the request remains uncertain, with the court yet to make a decision on whether to grant live broadcast access.
Lawyers representing former President Donald Trump told a New York judge on Monday that they oppose the request by media outlets to broadcast Trump's arraignment in court. The lawyers argued that granting live camera access would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise unique security concerns, putting the defendant at risk.
In a letter sent to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant, Trump's attorneys claimed that allowing video or photography of the proceedings would only heighten the already extraordinary security concerns related to Secret Service protection. The team emphasized that they are required by court rules to take into account potential security concerns and believe that live broadcasting would exacerbate these issues.
The request was made by various media outlets, including CNN, in an effort to provide live coverage of the arraignment on Tuesday. However, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has also expressed reservations about granting camera access, citing concerns over avoiding potential prejudice to the defendant, maintaining order, and ensuring public safety.
Despite these objections, there appears to be no categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment in New York state law or case precedent. However, prosecutors did note that a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was denied in 2021 for Trump's tax fraud case, with the judge allowing only a limited number of still photographs to be taken before proceedings began.
The outcome of the request remains uncertain, with the court yet to make a decision on whether to grant live broadcast access.
! So Trump's lawyers are all like "nope, no cameras" and I'm just over here thinking it's kinda funny that these outlets are asking for a front-row seat at his arraignment 
. Like, what's next? Asking for a VIP table at the courthouse cafeteria? 
. And can you blame the prosecutors for wanting to keep things under wraps? You don't want some paparazzi crew flashing their lights and cameras all over the courtroom 
.
. Maybe they should just put it to a vote – "shall cameras be allowed in court?" and let the people decide 
. Until then, I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens 
.
just watched the trailer for that upcoming Marvel movie and it's so cheesy 
it's gonna be live on camera tho - can't wait to see trump's mugshot and all the drama 
The judges gotta weigh the pros & cons and decide what's best for the whole situation. Maybe they'll just stick to still pics or audio recordings? 
Either way, I'm excited (or at least intrigued 
) to see how this all plays out!
The security concerns are valid, I'm not saying we should just let the cameras in without thinking it through.
.
. I mean, we've seen similar situations in the past where it's been pretty chaotic, and I can see how security concerns would be a major issue 
. Trump's lawyers have valid points about the potential risks, especially considering the Secret Service is already dealing with some high-profile threats. Plus, live cameras would only add to the drama and spectacle, which might not be ideal for a serious court proceeding 
. Whatever decision they make, it'll likely spark some controversy, so let's just wait and see how this all plays out 
.
Trump's lawyers are like "nope, not gonna let you livestream this circus" 
Meanwhile, CNN is all like "but we want to get our ratings up!" 
.
you know what's wild? we're 10 yrs past trump's first arraignment in 2019 & yet the concerns about cameras are still the same 
according to a study by pew research center, only 43% of americans think the media should be allowed to broadcast trials, while 55% disagree 
meanwhile, the average cost of securing trump's security in 2021 was around $10 MILLION 
that's more than what a small country like san marino spends on defense per year 