Authored by Catherine Yang via The Epoch Times,
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has denied former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss charges under the First Amendment, noting that the way the challenge was brought limited the arguments that could be made.
“Without foreclosing the ability to raise similar as-applied challenges at the appropriate time after the establishment of a factual record, the Defendants’ motions based on First Amendment grounds are denied,” the judge wrote in an April 4 order.
President Trump is being charged along with 14 others of violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for their actions in challenging the 2020 election results.
He had brought a First Amendment as-applied challenge, arguing that everything he said listed in the indictment was protected by the First Amendment.
But when such a challenge is made before trial, the only record of facts that can be used is the indictment itself. The allegations must be accepted as fact at this stage.
Much of President Trump’s speech is cited as part of the RICO charge, in which legal acts and truthful speech can be listed in order to show that an “operation” was in place, prosecutors explained.
The First Amendment does not protect speech “integral to criminal conduct, fraud, or speech presenting an imminent threat that the government can prevent,” the judge wrote.
Political speech is protected, as is communication to government officials, but protection “does not extend to allegedly fraudulent petitions,” the judge wrote.
In the indictment, prosecutors allege all included speech was tied to criminal conduct and the furtherance of a conspiracy.
Defense attorney Steve Sadow had argued that President Trump’s speech could not be prosecuted for falsity, but the judge found that prosecutors did not bring charges because the speech was “false” but because President Trump allegedly “knowingly” and “willfully” acted in a way that “impacted matters of governmental concern.”
As for proving out that intent, that was a matter for trial, he added.
“The allegations that the Defendants’ speech or conduct was carried out with criminal intent are something only a jury can resolve,” the order reads.
Kyle Becker shared some thoughts on X:
McAfee rejected the argument that Trump’s efforts to legally challenge the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment.
“The defense has not presented, nor is the Court able to find, any authority that the speech and conduct alleged is protected political speech,” McAfee wrote in his order.
The Democratic Party has sought to “overturn” the results of presidential elections in 2000, 2004, and 2016.
Democrats argued both Bush and Trump were “illegitimate” presidents and claimed the elections were “stolen.”
The radical left’s incendiary rhetoric about Trump led to interruptions of the electoral college proceedings in 2017 and incited violent riots on J20 during Trump’s inauguration.
Not a single, solitary Democrat has EVER been charged for seeking to “overturn” the results of an election.
This is ELECTION INTERFERENCE posing as a legal case. It has nothing to do with the law and it has nothing to do with justice.
Authored by Catherine Yang via The Epoch Times,
Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee has denied former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss charges under the First Amendment, noting that the way the challenge was brought limited the arguments that could be made.
“Without foreclosing the ability to raise similar as-applied challenges at the appropriate time after the establishment of a factual record, the Defendants’ motions based on First Amendment grounds are denied,” the judge wrote in an April 4 order.
President Trump is being charged along with 14 others of violating Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for their actions in challenging the 2020 election results.
He had brought a First Amendment as-applied challenge, arguing that everything he said listed in the indictment was protected by the First Amendment.
But when such a challenge is made before trial, the only record of facts that can be used is the indictment itself. The allegations must be accepted as fact at this stage.
Much of President Trump’s speech is cited as part of the RICO charge, in which legal acts and truthful speech can be listed in order to show that an “operation” was in place, prosecutors explained.
The First Amendment does not protect speech “integral to criminal conduct, fraud, or speech presenting an imminent threat that the government can prevent,” the judge wrote.
Political speech is protected, as is communication to government officials, but protection “does not extend to allegedly fraudulent petitions,” the judge wrote.
In the indictment, prosecutors allege all included speech was tied to criminal conduct and the furtherance of a conspiracy.
Defense attorney Steve Sadow had argued that President Trump’s speech could not be prosecuted for falsity, but the judge found that prosecutors did not bring charges because the speech was “false” but because President Trump allegedly “knowingly” and “willfully” acted in a way that “impacted matters of governmental concern.”
As for proving out that intent, that was a matter for trial, he added.
“The allegations that the Defendants’ speech or conduct was carried out with criminal intent are something only a jury can resolve,” the order reads.
Kyle Becker shared some thoughts on X:
McAfee rejected the argument that Trump’s efforts to legally challenge the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment.
“The defense has not presented, nor is the Court able to find, any authority that the speech and conduct alleged is protected political speech,” McAfee wrote in his order.
The Democratic Party has sought to “overturn” the results of presidential elections in 2000, 2004, and 2016.
Democrats argued both Bush and Trump were “illegitimate” presidents and claimed the elections were “stolen.”
The radical left’s incendiary rhetoric about Trump led to interruptions of the electoral college proceedings in 2017 and incited violent riots on J20 during Trump’s inauguration.
Not a single, solitary Democrat has EVER been charged for seeking to “overturn” the results of an election.
This is ELECTION INTERFERENCE posing as a legal case. It has nothing to do with the law and it has nothing to do with justice.
Loading…
