A federal judge on Saturday ordered former President Trump to respond to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request for a protective order by Monday evening.
The order involves the indictment Smith brought against Trump over his alleged criminal efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
In a brief order, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan gave Trump until 5 p.m. Monday to respond to Smith’s request.
“If Defendant disagrees with any portion of the government’s proposed Protective Order, his response shall include a revised version of that Protective Order with any modifications in red line,” Chutkan wrote.
Trump’s attorneys responded later Saturday with a request for a three-day extension, enabling them to respond by Thursday “to ensure counsel has adequate time to prepare a fulsome response.”
The request noted that typically, such requests provide defendants with 14 days to respond.
The extension would also allow time for the parties to discuss the matter and reach an agreement without court intervention, the filing submitted to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said.
“Friday evening ultimatums, given by the government before even calling defense counsel, are wholly unproductive and undermind the potential for party-driven resolutions,” the filing said.
If the parties can’t reach an agreement, Trump’s attorneys said a hearing would be needed to resolve the matter.
Chutkan turned back the request for an extension late Saturday, stating that the two sides can continue to confer before or after the Monday 5 p.m. deadline. “The court will determine whether to schedule a hearing to discuss the proposed protective order after reviewing Defendant’s response and, if included, his revised proposed protective order,” she wrote.
In his Friday night request, Smith sought the order on the grounds that Trump would leak sensitive information about the case on social media. The filing came after Trump wrote, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!,” in a Truth Social post.
Smith issued new indictments to Trump this week arguing that he made “knowingly false” claims of voter fraud in an effort to stay in power after losing the 2020 vote..
“If the defendant were to begin issuing public posts using details — or, for example, grand jury transcripts— obtained in discovery here, it could have a harmful chilling effect on witnesses or adversely affect the fair administration of justice in this case,” Smith wrote in the filing.