"Trump's Lawyers Push Back Against Broadcasting of Former President's Arraignment"
In a move that could potentially impact the highly anticipated arraignment of former US President Donald Trump, his lawyers have submitted an objection to media outlets' requests to broadcast the proceedings live. The opposition comes as concerns about security and the potential for a "circus-like atmosphere" have grown.
According to reports, Trump's attorneys argued in a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant that granting media access could heighten security risks and compromise President Trump's presumption of innocence. They also pointed out that any video or photography of the proceedings would only serve to amplify these concerns.
The lawyers' objections were echoed by Todd Blanche, one of the recent additions to the former president's legal team, who stated that allowing cameras in the courtroom could "only heighten" the serious security concerns associated with President Trump's presence. Furthermore, they noted that the media request would create an atmosphere more befitting a circus than a court proceeding.
On the other hand, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has deferred to the judge's discretion regarding how to manage the arraignment, but suggested that excluding or restricting videography and photography could help maintain order in the courtroom and avoid potential prejudice to the defendant. However, they also clarified that there does not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes.
The court will need to weigh these competing interests when making its decision on the media access request. With CNN and other major news outlets pushing for camera coverage of the proceedings, it remains to be seen how Judge Merchant will ultimately rule on this matter, which could have significant implications for the way in which President Trump's arraignment is presented to the public.
In a move that could potentially impact the highly anticipated arraignment of former US President Donald Trump, his lawyers have submitted an objection to media outlets' requests to broadcast the proceedings live. The opposition comes as concerns about security and the potential for a "circus-like atmosphere" have grown.
According to reports, Trump's attorneys argued in a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchant that granting media access could heighten security risks and compromise President Trump's presumption of innocence. They also pointed out that any video or photography of the proceedings would only serve to amplify these concerns.
The lawyers' objections were echoed by Todd Blanche, one of the recent additions to the former president's legal team, who stated that allowing cameras in the courtroom could "only heighten" the serious security concerns associated with President Trump's presence. Furthermore, they noted that the media request would create an atmosphere more befitting a circus than a court proceeding.
On the other hand, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has deferred to the judge's discretion regarding how to manage the arraignment, but suggested that excluding or restricting videography and photography could help maintain order in the courtroom and avoid potential prejudice to the defendant. However, they also clarified that there does not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes.
The court will need to weigh these competing interests when making its decision on the media access request. With CNN and other major news outlets pushing for camera coverage of the proceedings, it remains to be seen how Judge Merchant will ultimately rule on this matter, which could have significant implications for the way in which President Trump's arraignment is presented to the public.
. I mean, we're living in a time where things are getting pretty intense and crazy, and then you've got Trump's lawyers trying to block live broadcasts of his arraignment? It just feels like a big ol' game of cat-and-mouse between the media and the powers that be 
. I get that there might be security concerns and all that, but can't we just have an open book on this stuff already? The public has a right to know what's going down, you know? 
Security risks? More like drama queens! Can't handle the truth, can't handle cameras in court. Bring it on and let the circus begin! 
im curious to see how judge merchant gonna balance all this out
I mean, can't we trust that the courts have measures in place for these things already? 
. On one hand, I think it's reasonable for the media outlets to want to broadcast live coverage – it's a major news event after all 
. And on the other hand, I can see how having cameras there could add to the drama and create a circus-like atmosphere 
i mean, come on trump's got a right to his day in court just like anyone else. maybe if he didn't make such a big show of himself all the time, this wouldn't be an issue at all 
... news outlets just wanna give the people a sense of what's going down, you know? 
Circus-like atmosphere? More like circus-like lawyer antics 
. the media is just trying to get a scoop, thats all. but at the end of the day, its up to judge merchant to decide how much access they want to give them. i hope he sees through the drama and lets the people watch 
. The lawyers are trying to spin this as a security issue, but really it's just about control 
. News outlets just want to give the public a chance to see what's going down in real-time 
.
(Security Risks) 
but seriously, can't they just make up their minds? cameras in or out, what's the big deal? 
. On one hand, I get why they'd want to prevent any potential disruptions or disruptions from happening in the courtroom... but on the other hand, isn't this what we're paying our lawyers for? 
. Maybe it's just a case of them trying to protect their client's image... or maybe they just don't wanna see themselves on TV