Title

**Title**: Judge Merchan's Lifted Gag Order Insufficient, Says Legal Analyst

**Sapo**: Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett criticizes the partial lifting of the gag order against former President Trump, arguing that it should have been lifted after the trial concluded. He also expresses concern about the potential consequences of the New York appellate court's decision to not address the First Amendment implications of the gag order.

Title

**Article**:

Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett has condemned the partial lifting of the gag order against former President Trump, arguing that it should have been revoked entirely when the trial concluded. Jarrett made his comments Wednesday on "FOX & Friends," expressing frustration that the order was upheld at all.

Title

"This is another warped and senseless ruling by Judge Merchan," Jarrett asserted. "This gag order was already an unconstitutional prior restraint of speech. It should have been lifted weeks ago when the trial ended, the jurors are dismissed. The fact that it wasn't underscores, I think, the unfair treatment of Donald Trump."

Jarrett questioned why the order wasn't lifted immediately after the trial's conclusion, arguing that nothing had changed to warrant a partial lifting now. He also expressed bafflement at the New York appellate court's decision not to address the substantial constitutional questions raised by the gag order.

Title

"Are you kidding me? Other than that pesky little document called the First Amendment. Silencing a presidential candidate not only violates his free speech rights, but the rights of listeners, the American public. They have a protected right to hear political speech," Jarrett said.

The partial lifting of the gag order came Tuesday, weeks after a jury found Trump guilty on all counts in a criminal tax fraud case. Trump and his legal team have been fighting the gag order since it was imposed at the start of the trial, but ramped up their efforts when it concluded last month.

Title

Merchan's gag order had barred Trump from making or directing others to make public statements about witnesses with regard to their potential participation or about counsel in the case — other than Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg — or about court staff, DA staff or family members of staff.

Trump is now able to speak about protected witnesses and jurors. However, he is still blocked from commenting about individual prosecutors, court staff and their family members. That portion of the gag order will remain in effect until Trump's sentencing on July 11.

Jarrett's criticism of the gag order and the partial lifting echoes similar concerns raised by other legal experts. Many have argued that the order was an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech, and that it violated Trump's First Amendment rights.

The New York appellate court's decision not to address the First Amendment implications of the gag order has also been criticized. Some experts have argued that the court's decision sets a dangerous precedent for future cases involving prior restraints on speech.

It remains to be seen whether Trump will challenge the remaining portion of the gag order. However, Jarrett's criticism and the concerns raised by other legal experts suggest that the order could face further legal challenges.