LEGAL
Court narrows restraining order against Mary
Trump book
An appeals judge ruled that Simon & Schuster
should not be blocked from printing or distributing the book.
“The legitimate interest in preserving family secrets
may be one thing for the family of a real estate developer, no matter how
successful; it is another matter for the family of the President of the United
States.”
Judge Alan
Scheinkman
By JOSH
GERSTEIN
07/01/2020
10:19 PM EDT
Updated:
07/01/2020 11:51 PM EDT
An appeals
judge has partially lifted a temporary restraining order that barred
publication of a book in which President Donald Trump’s niece offers a scathing
portrait of the Trump family.
In a ruling
Wednesday, Supreme Court Justice Alan Scheinkman said another judge erred
Tuesday by issuing a broad restraining order that prohibited publisher Simon
& Schuster from printing or distributing copies of the book.
“S&S is
not a party to the settlement agreement [and] this Court perceives no basis for
S&S to be specifically enjoined,” Scheinkman wrote in a six-page order in
the suit, filed by President Trump’s brother Robert. “Unlike Ms. Trump, S&S
has not agreed to surrender or relinquish any of its First Amendment rights.”
The appeals
judge left the order in place against Mary Trump and “any agent” of hers,
leaving some uncertainty about whether Simon & Schuster is still covered by
the order or would be risking contempt of court by moving forward with plans to
release the book, which is due to come out July 28 under the title: “‘Too Much
and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.”
A spokesman
for Simon & Schuster did not directly address the company’s plans, but
suggested the firm was waiting to see how the original judge on the case,
Poughkeepsie-based Justice Hal Greenwald, rules on a preliminary injunction
barring the memoir.
“We support
Mary L. Trump’s right to tell her story in ‘Too Much and Never Enough,‘ a work
of great interest and importance to the national discourse that fully deserves
to be published for the benefit of the American public,” the spokesman, Adam
Rothberg, said in a statement. “As all know, there are well-established
precedents against prior restraint and pre-publication injunctions, and we
remain confident that the preliminary injunction will be denied.”
“The legitimate interest in preserving family secrets
may be one thing for the family of a real estate developer, no matter how
successful; it is another matter for the family of the President of the United
States.”
Judge Alan
Scheinkman
The suit
filed last week seeks to enforce confidentiality provisions in a settlement
agreement several members of the Trump family entered into in 2001 to resolve
litigation over the estate of President Trump’s father, Fred Jr., who died in
1999.
Scheinkman
said the earlier ruling from Greenwald failed to take into account the fact
that the public interest in matters relating to the Trump family is quite
different today than it was two decades ago.
“The
legitimate interest in preserving family secrets may be one thing for the
family of a real estate developer, no matter how successful; it is another
matter for the family of the President of the United States,” the judge wrote.
Scheinkman
also noted that the non-disclosure agreement in the settlement seems to be
open-ended, but precedent requires that courts issuing injunctions take account
of whether the restraint is “temporally and geographically reasonable.”
“The
passage of time and changes in circumstances may have rendered at least some of
the restrained information less significant than it was at the time and,
conversely, whatever legitimate public interest there may have been in the
family disputes of a real estate developer and his relatives may be
considerably heightened by that real estate developer now being President of
the United States and a current candidate for re-election,” the judge said.
President
Trump is listed in the settlement as one of the family members Mary Trump
promises not to discuss her relationship with. While the president has endorsed
the legal effort to scuttle publication of the book, he is not a party to the
suit, which is captioned: “Trump v. Trump.”
Charles
Harder, an attorney who is representing Robert Trump and regularly represents
President Trump and the Trump campaign in similar cases seeking to enforce
confidentiality agreements, did not immediately respond to a request for
comment on the latest developments in the suit.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário