America First Legal (AFL) has filed an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, challenging Special Counsel Jack Smith's attempt to impose a gag order on former President Donald J. Trump. The brief, submitted in collaboration with Stone Hilton PLLC and Lawson Huck Gonzalez, PLLC, argues that such a gag order would violate Trump's constitutionally protected right to free speech.
The AFL contends that gag orders are generally incompatible with the First Amendment and have historically been disfavored by courts. The organization emphasizes that freedom of speech is fundamental to American identity and essential for a functioning free society. As a current presidential candidate, Trump plays a unique role in informing the public and contributing to political debate; thus, restricting his speech would stifle the entire American political system.
The brief further argues that limiting a presidential candidate's ability to speak on political matters constitutes a severe intrusion on democratic principles established by the Founding Fathers. According to AFL, candidates must be allowed to engage in open expression without restrictions, as any limitations infringe upon the broader American electoral system.
AFL asserts that the government has not met the necessary statutory conditions to justify imposing restrictions on Trump's speech based on safety or prejudice grounds. The organization claims there is no evidence suggesting Trump has incited violence through his speech.
Gene Hamilton, Executive Director of America First Legal, stated: "Jack Smith and the Biden Department of Justice are engaged in an unprecedented attack on essential freedoms in the United States. Their desire to engage in court-sanctioned censorship of Donald Trump is dangerous and inconsistent with the history of the First Amendment–and sadly consistent with the Biden Administration’s broader campaign of destruction of the right to speak freely in the United States. There is no evidence that President Trump has sought to hamper the impartiality of the jury or incite violence. He is a political candidate whose rights to speak and protest are especially acute given his belief he is the target of a politicized prosecution."