Donald Trump's arraignment on Tuesday may not be broadcast live, as his lawyers have asked a New York judge to deny media outlets' requests to cover the event. In a letter sent to Judge Juan Merchant, Trump's attorneys argue that allowing cameras and video coverage would create a "circus-like atmosphere" and raise unique security concerns.
The team, which includes new hire Todd Blanche, claims that any broadcast of the proceedings could heighten these serious concerns, including Secret Service-related risks. They submitted that it is inconsistent with President Trump's presumption of innocence to allow media coverage, citing the potential for "prejudice" against the defendant and the need to maintain an orderly proceeding.
However, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has responded, stating that they are deferring to the judge's discretion to decide how best to manage the courtroom. The district attorney's office noted that excluding or restricting videography, photography, and radio coverage could be a "defensible exercise" of the court's authority to manage proceedings.
Interestingly, prosecutors pointed out that there does not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law. They also mentioned that a similar request was made for Trump's 2021 arraignment in the tax fraud case against him and his CFO Allen Weisselberg.
In this instance, the judge may need to consider the specific circumstances of each case when deciding whether or not to allow media coverage. As one of the outlets requesting camera access, CNN will be watching closely to see how Judge Merchant decides to proceed with the arraignment on Tuesday.
The team, which includes new hire Todd Blanche, claims that any broadcast of the proceedings could heighten these serious concerns, including Secret Service-related risks. They submitted that it is inconsistent with President Trump's presumption of innocence to allow media coverage, citing the potential for "prejudice" against the defendant and the need to maintain an orderly proceeding.
However, the Manhattan District Attorney's office has responded, stating that they are deferring to the judge's discretion to decide how best to manage the courtroom. The district attorney's office noted that excluding or restricting videography, photography, and radio coverage could be a "defensible exercise" of the court's authority to manage proceedings.
Interestingly, prosecutors pointed out that there does not appear to be a categorical prohibition on cameras during an arraignment under existing New York statutes and case law. They also mentioned that a similar request was made for Trump's 2021 arraignment in the tax fraud case against him and his CFO Allen Weisselberg.
In this instance, the judge may need to consider the specific circumstances of each case when deciding whether or not to allow media coverage. As one of the outlets requesting camera access, CNN will be watching closely to see how Judge Merchant decides to proceed with the arraignment on Tuesday.
... it's like trying to get a scoop at a Britney Spears concert back in 2001 - remember those? 
Anyway, I'm kinda surprised Trump's lawyers are trying to keep this whole thing under wraps. What's with the "circus-like atmosphere" thing, though? Sounds like they're just worried about getting caught on camera 
. The DA's office is right to let Judge Merchant make a call, though - it's not like we've never seen these kinds of arraignments before 
. 2003's Tom Cruise trial comes to mind... who could forget that? 
But seriously, the DA office is right in saying they should defer to the judge's discretion. Its not like they want to suppress the truth or anything. And who knows, maybe having cameras in would actually help keep things orderly and prevent any... unpleasantness. 
Let the public decide for themselves! And honestly, I think the Secret Service concerns are just an excuse 
. And can we talk about the "circus-like atmosphere" thing for a sec? Like, isn't that just code for "I don't want bad press"? 
. First off, Trump's lawyers are tryin' to block media coverage 'cause they know people are gonna be all over it like a bad rash 
. They're makin' all these "security concerns" and "circus-like atmosphere" stuff, but I think it's just a cover-up. The real reason is that Trump's team knows the cameras are gonna catch him slippin' up somewhere. And what about all those "prejudice" claims? That's some weak sauce 
they're worried about security concerns but like we all know he's going down for something and it's hard to deny that at this point 
i'm just curious what the judge will decide, hopefully it'll be a live broadcast, we need more drama in our lives 
But at the same time, I think his lawyers are right, a circus-like atmosphere would be super bad for him... you know? 
And can we talk about how ridiculous it is that he's getting special treatment just because of who he is?! 
I'm literally shaking right now thinking about it... like what if they don't broadcast it live?!?! 
I mean, come on, we're talking about a high-profile arraignment here! The public has a right to know what's going down. It's not fair that Trump's team gets to dictate how much transparency there is. Can't they just be honest for once?!?! 
I hope CNN gets some good footage on this one! 
. Shouldn't there be some transparency? Maybe they don't want it to get ugly if the DA's office can prove something 
. I'm rooting for CNN, they're usually pretty fair and will give us an accurate rundown of what happens in court 
Either way, I'll be glued to my screen on Tuesday 
. Plus, excluding cameras could lead to some major issues with security...like what if protesters show up or something? 
Can't say I condone any attempts to create a "circus-like atmosphere", but at the same time, transparency is kinda key here 
They need to keep us in the loop, not try to spin it like they're above the law. This whole thing has all the makings of a classic media battle – and I am HERE. FOR. IT 
. And the DA's office is all "hey, we're good with whatever the judge decides"... but what's the real motive here? Is it really just about security and fairness, or is there more to it? 
And then you got CNN just sittin' back and watchin', waitin' for the judge to make his move... it's like we're all just pawns in this game, ain't we? 
. The DA's office is saying they're deferring to the judge's discretion, so fingers crossed that Judge Merchant does the right thing and lets us see what's going down in real-time 
