Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has a “troubling” position in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial, according to legal analyst and attorney Jonathan Turley on Friday.
Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, became the first former president in U.S. history to stand trial in a criminal case on Monday. Following an investigation by Bragg’s office, Trump was indicted in March 2023 on charges of falsifying business records relating to hush money paid to adult-film star Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels alleges that she had an affair with Trump in 2006, which he has denied. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges and said the case against him is politically motivated.
Amid the first week of trial, Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche asked who the district attorney’s office planned to call as their first three witnesses. Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, however, refused to say because of the former president’s negative social media comments about potential witnesses in the case.
Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over the case, last month imposed a gag order on Trump, barring him from making public statements about witnesses, including Daniels and Trump’s former attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, as well as lawyers and staff in the case and their families. The order excluded Merchan and Bragg. It was later expanded to include the families of Merchan and Bragg after Trump made blistering attacks toward the judge’s daughter, Loren Merchan.
MICHAEL M. SANTIAGO and SARAH YENESEL / POOL / AFP/Getty Images
On Friday, Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, took to X, formerly Twitter, in a series of posts to discuss Trump’s trial and the prosecution’s decision not to reveal their witness list.
“…There was a troubling aspect about Bragg’s position. Bragg is saying that he may have given the names, but will not do so due to the alleged violations. The court should have been clear that any witness who may be called in the next 24 hours or so must be disclosed. That is not one of the sanctions for a violation of the order. Bragg’s office may be saying that it will not reveal the names before it must do so in light of the conduct of the president. Many judges would have encouraged him to do so and reminded Bragg that any sanction for a violation will rest with the court on the gag order,” he wrote.
Turley added that the court should have advised Bragg to disclose, adding that it serves the “interests of due process.”
“The court, in my view, should have asked Bragg to err on the side of disclosure. In some cases, the lack of the notice could be used by the defense to oppose an appearance if expected testimony is curtailed or delayed. Disclosure serves the interests of due process and the general efficiency of the trial process,” he wrote.
Newsweek has reached out to Turley and Bragg’s office via email for comment.
Meanwhile, the prosecution on Monday introduced a motion to sanction Trump for social media posts that they argue violate his gag order, requesting that Trump be fined $1,000 apiece for three potential violations. Merchan announced he will hear arguments regarding violations of the gag order on April 23 at 9:30 a.m. Opening statements in the trial are set to begin on Monday.
Former federal prosecutor and legal analyst Renato Mariotti reacted to the decision by noting that Trump’s social media attack on witnesses “finally have real consequences.”
“Typically, the prosecution *does* reveal the witnesses it will call the next day. Judge Merchan exercising discretion to penalize behavior that endangers witnesses will be a far more effective tool than a $1,000 fine,” he wrote on X.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.