{"id":1123481,"date":"2024-03-29T02:47:21","date_gmt":"2024-03-29T06:47:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/uncategorized\/first-amendment-protects-trump-from-fani-williss-election-interference-charges-attorney-argues-washington-examiner\/"},"modified":"2024-03-29T02:47:21","modified_gmt":"2024-03-29T06:47:21","slug":"first-amendment-protects-trump-from-fani-williss-election-interference-charges-attorney-argues-washington-examiner","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/first-amendment-2\/first-amendment-protects-trump-from-fani-williss-election-interference-charges-attorney-argues-washington-examiner\/","title":{"rendered":"First Amendment protects Trump from Fani Williss election interference charges, attorney argues &#8211; Washington Examiner"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    A judge held a hearing Thursday to examine former President    Donald    Trumps argument that Fulton County District    Attorney Fani Williss case against    him in Georgia should be    dismissed because Trumps actions cited in her indictment were    protected by the First Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    Judge Scott McAfee heard arguments from both Trumps attorney    and prosecutors about the matter, but the judge gave no    indication as to where he stood on it or when he would issue a    decision.  <\/p>\n<p>    Trumps attorney Steve Sadow urged McAfee to consider that    Williss indictment, in which she alleged Trump violated    Georgias racketeering law by illegally conspiring to overturn    the 2020 election, was ripe for a First Amendment challenge.  <\/p>\n<p>    McAfee had already denied similar motions brought by    co-defendants Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell, determining    that dismissing the indictment on First Amendment grounds at    this stage was premature.  <\/p>\n<p>    On Thursday, Sadow argued that Williss indictment was built    entirely on actions shielded by protections for freedom of    speech and expression under the Constitution.  <\/p>\n<p>    McAfee said, however, that some crimes can be achieved solely    through speech, though, [such as] terroristic threats,    solicitation.  <\/p>\n<p>    Why is that not whats happening here as alleged? McAfee    asked.  <\/p>\n<p>    I dont think theres any question that statements, comments,    speech, expressive conduct that deals with campaigning or    elections has always been found to be at the zenith of    protected speech, Sadow replied.  <\/p>\n<p>    Williss indictment was sweeping and included 161 actions that    she alleged amounted to a racketeering violation by Trump and    18 co-defendants. She alleged that Trump, in particular,    falsely declared he won the 2020 election, helped arrange for    an alternate set of electors in Georgia, and helped create and    deliver a fraudulent certificate of votes to state officials.  <\/p>\n<p>    One must determine immediately whether that constitutes core    political speech, and I suggest that it does, Sadow said in    reference to Trumps speech and actions cited in the    indictment.  <\/p>\n<p>    Neither Trump nor Willis were present at the hearing.  <\/p>\n<p>    Donald Wakeford, a prosecutor appearing on behalf of Willis,    noted how Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington,    D.C., had already ruled against the same First Amendment    argument in Trumps federal election interference case. Chutkan    declined to dismiss that case on First Amendment grounds after    Trump argued his actions in the indictment there reflected    genuine concerns about the election that he had a right to    vocalize. Chutkan said the argument was better suited for a    jury to consider at trial.  <\/p>\n<p>    Wakeford said he was hardly going to improve upon the findings    of the federal judge.  <\/p>\n<p>    But he noted that the First Amendment argument should go beyond    determining whether Trump was well-intentioned or whether he    knowingly made false claims and committed fraudulent actions.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its not just that he lied over and over and over again,    Wakeford said. Its that each of those was employed as part of    criminal activity with criminal intentions for which the First    Amendment did not provide cover.  <\/p>\n<p>    CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM    THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER  <\/p>\n<p>    Trump is facing 10 charges in the case related to the 2020    election. McAfee has not scheduled a trial yet, and one may not    take place for several months. The pretrial process was    derailed by roughly two months beginning in January, when Trump    and others called for McAfee to disqualify Willis from the case    over an undisclosed relationship she had with one of the    prosecutors working on it.  <\/p>\n<p>    McAfee determined that Willis displayed a tremendous lapse in    judgment but said she could continue overseeing the case so    long as she terminated the prosecutor. Trump and other    co-defendants have appealed his decision, and the Georgia Court    of Appeals is now weighing whether to take up the argument.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read this article:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/justice\/2943380\/first-amendment-protects-trump-from-fani-williss-election-interference-charges-attorney-argues\/\" title=\"First Amendment protects Trump from Fani Williss election interference charges, attorney argues - Washington Examiner\" rel=\"noopener\">First Amendment protects Trump from Fani Williss election interference charges, attorney argues - Washington Examiner<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> A judge held a hearing Thursday to examine former President Donald Trumps argument that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Williss case against him in Georgia should be dismissed because Trumps actions cited in her indictment were protected by the First Amendment.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/first-amendment-2\/first-amendment-protects-trump-from-fani-williss-election-interference-charges-attorney-argues-washington-examiner\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[94877],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1123481","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-first-amendment-2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1123481"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1123481"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1123481\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1123481"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1123481"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1123481"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}