Judge denies request to restrict Trump statements about law enforcement in classified records case

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case in Florida on Tuesday denied prosecutors’ request to bar the former president from making public statements that could endanger law enforcement agents participating in the prosecution.

Prosecutors had told U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that the restriction was necessary to protect law enforcement from potential threats and harassment after the presumptive Republican presidential nominee baselessly claimed that the Biden administration wanted to kill him during a search of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, nearly two years ago.

Cannon chided prosecutors in her order denying their request, saying they didn’t give defense lawyers adequate time to discuss the matter before it was filed Friday evening. The judge warned prosecutors that failing to comply with court requirements in the future may lead to sanctions. She denied the request without prejudice, meaning prosecutors could file it again.

A spokesperson for special counsel Jack Smith’s team declined to comment Tuesday.

The judge’s decision came as Trump’s lawyers were delivering their closing argument at trial in another criminal case he’s facing in New York stemming from a hush money payment to a porn actor during the 2016 presidential campaign.

It’s the latest example of bitterness between Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, and prosecutors who have accused the former president of illegally hoarding at his Mar-a-Lago estate classified documents that he took with him after he left the White House in 2021 and then obstructing the FBI’s efforts to get them back. Trump has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing.

Cannon has chided prosecutors both in hearings and in court papers over a number of matters, including telling Smith’s team during one hearing that it was “wasting the court’s time.” Prosecutors have also signaled mounting frustration with Cannon’s rulings, saying in one recent court filing that a request from the judge was based on a “fundamentally flawed legal premise.”

Prosecutors’ request followed a distorted claim by Trump last week that the FBI agents who searched his Mar-a-Lago estate in August 2022 were “authorized to shoot me” and were “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.”

Trump was referring to the disclosure in a court document that the FBI, during the search followed a standard use-of-force policy that prohibits the use of deadly force except when the officer conducting the search has a reasonable belief that the “subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.”

The Justice Department policy is routine and meant to limit, rather than encourage, the use of force during searches. Prosecutors noted that the search of the Florida property was intentionally conducted when Trump and his family were out of state and was coordinated in advance with the U.S. Secret Service. No force was used.

Florida Senate Approves Ban Of Homeless People From Sleeping on Public Property

The Florida Senate has recently passed a bill that places a ban on homeless camps to address the homelessness crisis in the state. This new legislation will require cities and counties to prevent individuals from sleeping in public places, forcing local governments to create designated encampment sites instead.

While some see this bill as a positive step towards addressing homelessness and providing necessary services to those in need, others are wary of the potential consequences. Critics argue that criminalizing homelessness by banning individuals from public spaces and threatening them with arrest is not a solution to the root causes of homelessness. They also raise concerns about the lack of provisions for safety, sanitation, and basic necessities in these encampment sites.

Despite the controversy surrounding the bill, Governor Ron DeSantis has expressed his support for it and is expected to sign it into law soon. Proponents of the bill, such as Ron Book of the Miami-Dade Homeless Trust, believe that while the bill may not be perfect, it is a step in the right direction. Book emphasizes the need for a comprehensive plan, adequate funding, and strong leadership to effectively address homelessness in the state.

Implementing this program statewide would come with a hefty price tag of over $500 million.