To no one’s surprise, Justice Juan Merchan found Trump in contempt of his gag order.

This Court rejects Defendant’s arguments and finds that the People have established the elements of criminal contempt beyond a reasonable doubt as to Exhibits 2-10. This Court’s Expanded Order is lawful and unambiguous. Defendant violated the Order by making social  media posts about known witnesses pertaining to their participation in this criminal  proceeding and by making public statements about jurors in this criminal proceeding.

“Reposting,” as the court characterized it, or “Retruthing” as Trump would prefer since that will trick everyone into believing that makes it truthy, is no different than saying it sui generis.

Addressing first what has been referred to as “reposts,” Exhibits 1, 4, 5,6,7,8 and 9, this
Court finds that a repost, whether with or without commentary by the Defendant, is in fact a statement of the Defendant. The issue of “reposting” appears to be a question of first impression. Lacking legal authority to guide its decision, this Court must, as defense counsel stated at the hearing, rely on common sense.

Both the Truth Social account and the official campaign website, exclusively represent the opinions and views of the Defendant, and neither is an open forum for others to post their own content. Defendant curated the posts at issue and then took the necessary steps to publish the posts on his Truth Social account and on his campaign website. In doing so, he endorsed the posts with one purpose in mind – to maximize viewership and to communicate his stamp of approval.

The one area where Justice Merchan saw the free speech balance tip toward Trump was in responding to witnesses, particularly the disgraced and disgraceful Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.

It is of utmost importance to this Court that the Expanded Order not be used as a sword instead of a shield by potential witnesses. Consideration of such usage will be weighed by this Court when ruling on the willfulness of any future claims of alleged violations of the Expanded Order as well as when determining appropriate punishment, if any. In fact, the Court may very well consider the propriety of continuing the limitation on extra judicial speech as it relates to certain individuals…

And if the witnesses use their platform to attack Trump with the expectation that he can’t respond, they will test Justice Merchan’s patience.

However, if a protected party turns that underlying purpose on its head, it becomes apparent that the protected party likely does not need to be protected by the Expanded Order.

This is about as thoughtful, fair and proper a finding as could possibly issue. Despite all his whining and dissembling, Justice Merchan has risen above the rancor to do his job well, apply with law without fear or favor no matter how hard Trump tries to goad him into being partisan so he can play the victim in fundraising emails.

That said, what can be done to make Trump comply with Justice Merchan’s order?

Criminal contempt is punishable by a fine not exceeding $ 1 ,000, by jail not exceeding 30 days or by both in the discretion of the court, for each violation of a court order. Judiciary Law $ 7 51(1). The Judiciary Law permits this punishment “to protect the dignity of the judicial system and to compel respect for its mandates,” and “to punish the contemnor for disobeying a court order.” However, the Judiciary Law, does not vest the Court with authority to craft an appropriate punishment when a $1,000 fine will not achieve the intended purpose. While $1,000 may suffice in most instances to protect the dignity of the judicial system, to compel respect for its mandates and to punish the offender for disobeying a court order, it unfortunately will not achieve the desired result in those instances where the contemnor can easily afford such a fine. In those circumstances, it would be preferable if the Court could impose a fine more commensurate with the wealth of the contemnor.

Would any amount of money be sufficient to compel the contemnor’s compliance? Perhaps, but since the law limits the amount to $1000, whether the money is the contemnor’s or donations by the unwitting, it’s unlikely to have much impact. But then there’s the alternative punishment, 30 days in jail.

THEREFORE, Defendant is hereby warned that the Court will not tolerate continued willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment…

First, let there be no doubt that any “common” defendant would already be a guest of the City at Rikers. Trump is receiving the most generous of treatment here, his whining notwithstanding. At the same time, Justice Merchan has included enough wiggle words in his admonition to leave him enough latitude to drive a Mack truck through should Trump persist in violating the gag order. The very idea of putting an ex-president in jail is so stunning as to be avoided at all costs, and Justice Merchan can’t possibly want to be remembered as the judge who tested a president by having him bused over the bridge to the Rock.

And what does Trump have to say about all this?

Much as I respect Justice Juan Merchan’s efforts to give even a despised defendant a fair and impartial trial, I do not envy the choice the defendant will ram down his throat. And I do not see that Justice Merchan will ultimately have much of a choice to make. Either court orders are honored or not, and it appears that Trump is determined to force Justice Merchan’s hand.