#Trump seeks latitude in sharing evidence in Jan. 6 case with public, ‘volunteer attorneys’

Donald Trump’s legal team turned to the First Amendment in combating a Justice Department (DOJ) request to limit what evidence he can share and discuss with the public, parroting the former president’s claims the protective order takes aim at his candidacy.

Monday’s filing echoes one of Trump’s defenses to the broader Jan. 6 case, arguing he should only be limited from sharing “sensitive” evidence in the case with the public, while pushing for “volunteer attorneys” to have access to the full range of discovery in the case.

The protective order, a routine request from prosecutors, structures how to handle evidence in the case, and was requested by the DOJ just hours after Trump made an incendiary comment on social media.

“In a trial about First Amendment rights, the government seeks to restrict First Amendment rights,” Trump’s attorney wrote in the filing, calling the DOJ’s request too broad.

“Worse, it does so against its administration’s primary political opponent.”

Trump was warned in his Thursday arraignment about making any improper contact with witnesses in the case.

But in the Friday request from the prosecution, they noted Trump “has previously issued public statements on social media regarding witnesses, judges, attorneys and others associated with legal matters pending against him.”

The request noted Trump would have access to a broad range of material, including details on witness testimony and information gathered through subpoenas.

It then included a screenshot of Trump’s message just hours earlier, one his campaign would later say was not directed at any one individual.

“IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!” Trump wrote.

The First Amendment has become a core argument for Trump’s team.

While such a defense may not fare well in the broader Jan. 6 case – where prosecutors have argued any Trump claims have no bearing on otherwise criminal efforts to seek to remain in office – they could prove more effective in the much more narrow discussion on the protective order.

The Trump team’s proposed red line would bar the sharing only of sensitive records in the case, something it seeks to define as evidence that would jeopardize witness security or deals with confidential sources.

“The need to protect that information does not require a blanket gag order over all documents produced by the government. Rather, the Court can, and should, limit its protective order to genuinely sensitive materials—a less restrictive alternative that would satisfy any government interest in confidentiality while preserving the First Amendment rights of President Trump and the public,” Trump’s attorneys John Lauro and Todd Blanche wrote in the filing, calling DOJ’s current language “untargeted.”

On Friday the Justice Department said the discovery in the case will include everything from subpoena returns, witness testimony, exhibits presented to the grand jury and material obtained through search warrants. 

“If the defendant were to begin issuing public posts using details—or, for example, grand jury transcripts—obtained in discovery here, it could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case,” DOJ wrote.

The Trump filing also suggests that much like in the aftermath of his election loss, Trump may rely on a series of unpaid attorneys to help with the case, wishing to provide them access to discovery documents.

“Defense counsel may choose to bring on, for instance, volunteer attorneys or others without paid employment arrangements to assist with the preparation of this case. The government cannot preclude the assistance of those individuals, nor should President Trump be required to seek permission from the Court before any such individual assists the defense,” Trump’s team writes.

Special Counsel Jack Smith similarly sought a protective order in the Mar-a-Lago case, which deals with a substantial amount of highly classified information.

Updated 6:14 p.m.