Former President Donald Trump's lawyers have told a New York judge that they oppose media outlets broadcasting his arraignment on Tuesday, citing concerns about creating a "circus-like atmosphere" and raising security risks.
The lawyers argued in a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchán that allowing cameras into the courtroom could heighten security concerns, including those related to Trump's Secret Service protection. They also pointed out that any video or photography of the proceedings would only exacerbate these concerns.
In response, the Manhattan District Attorney's office said it was deferring to the judge to decide how best to manage the arraignment, but noted that it did not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law. However, they also pointed out that a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was made in 2021 for Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg's tax fraud case and was allowed with limitations.
The decision on whether to allow camera access will ultimately be up to the judge, who has yet to make an official ruling on the matter. CNN is one of several outlets requesting access to broadcast the arraignment live.
The lawyers argued in a letter to Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchán that allowing cameras into the courtroom could heighten security concerns, including those related to Trump's Secret Service protection. They also pointed out that any video or photography of the proceedings would only exacerbate these concerns.
In response, the Manhattan District Attorney's office said it was deferring to the judge to decide how best to manage the arraignment, but noted that it did not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law. However, they also pointed out that a similar request for audio-video broadcasting was made in 2021 for Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg's tax fraud case and was allowed with limitations.
The decision on whether to allow camera access will ultimately be up to the judge, who has yet to make an official ruling on the matter. CNN is one of several outlets requesting access to broadcast the arraignment live.
... Trump's arraignment is going to be all over the news and it's already creating a lot of drama 
. But at the same time, people have a right to know what's happening and if there are security concerns that are valid, maybe they should be taken seriously 
. I get why the Secret Service would want to protect Trump but I also think it's kinda unfair to the public who just wants to see this play out 
. Can't we just have a normal arraignment without all the fuss and drama? 
But seriously, it does make sense that his lawyers are worried about security risks and creating a circus-like atmosphere. I'd want my grandma to feel safe in court too 
. And on the other hand, I'm all for transparency and holding public figures accountable. It's like, they're not above the law just because of their last name or fame status 
. Can't wait to see how this plays out!
). And btw, can we just talk about how ridiculous it is that they're trying to dictate what gets broadcasted? Like, isn't that kinda... presidential? 
Anyway, I think the judge should let cameras in. It's public interest and all that jazz 
.
. And honestly, can't they just let people watch the arraignment online if it's that private? Like, it's not like he's going to jump out of his seat and start yelling 
!
.
. I'm not convinced either way just yet, but I do think we should see some level of accountability from Trump's team. Maybe it'll be a live broadcast and we can all see for ourselves if there's really any reason to hide behind this security risk nonsense 
.
. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see some visuals of the arraignment in action 
, but at the same time, I can understand why they're worried about raising security risks 
It's a public figure, after all. Can't we just have some basic transparency here? I'm sure the Secret Service can handle themselves. But what about our right to know what's going down? 
like what do they have to hide? it's public arraignment, it should be open to the media and the people who care about holding him accountable for his actions. this whole "circus-like atmosphere" thing sounds like a load of BS - it's just an excuse to keep things under wraps. and security risks? please, trump's got more entourage than a Kardashian wedding 
. And now they're whining about Secret Service protection? Give me a break 
. News at 11... or in this case, news at arraignment 
.
. If Trump is really as big of a deal as they say he is, shouldn't we know what's going on in that courtroom? It feels like they just want to keep this thing under wraps because they don’t wanna face the consequences of whatever Trump did wrong 
.
.
. I mean, who doesn't love a good drama, right?