Trump has no serious first amendment defense in a court of law. Here's why | Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

53% : There, the court made clear that rights derived from the first amendment "must not be allowed to divert the trial from the very purpose of a court system . . ." including "the requirement that the jury's verdict be based on evidence received in open court, not from outside sources".To ensure "the purpose of the court system", Judge Chutkan did what is normal in cases of significant media interest and cases where there are risks to witnesses or of publicly disclosed grand jury material tainting the jury pool.
52% : The first amendment does not immunize him from conviction because he did so.
51% : The supreme court has said that where good cause for a protective order exists, it "does not offend the first amendment."
45% : If Donald Trump stood in the middle of Fifth Avenue after robbing the Chase Bank branch by passing a note to the teller saying, "Your money or your life," he'd likely plead the first amendment as his defense: "I was just exercising my rights to free speech!"Of course, he'd be wrong.
36% : Words that criminal defendants have written or spoken are used against them all the time.
36% : Words that criminal defendants have written or spoken are used against them all the time.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.