Trump Attorneys Ask Court to Unseal Documents Ahead of Criminal Trial

Attorneys for former President Donald Trump have asked a New York Supreme Court judge to unseal court documents and correspondence related to the upcoming criminal trial—the first-ever criminal trial against a former or sitting president in American history.

Thus far, the public docket has remained empty since Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg indicted President Trump last April. Files are made public days after their filing to allow parties to submit redactions.

The defense is now asking Justice Juan Merchan to unseal all pleadings, orders, and written communications involving the court and parties, and to allow simultaneous public access of all future filings unless “redactions are required by the protective order or law.”

The defense argued that a public record will be necessary for any review they may request from an appeals court, and “critically important in light of the Court’s important rulings relating to, among others, the impending trial date and the prosecutorial misconduct issues that President Trump has raised based on recent developments.”

The attorneys revealed that the judge had multiple times issued “substantive rulings” that have not been made public, and that the files that are made public are generally delayed “well past the time” they were submitted.

For example, the letter requesting court permission to unseal the docket was sent on March 10 and made public on March 19.

DA Misconduct Allegations

The defense also specifically pointed to a March 8 email that Justice Merchan sent prohibiting parties from filing any new motions without the court’s permission.

Related Stories

The letter had been sent in response to several key requests made by the defense, including allegations of misconduct on the district attorney’s part and the upcoming presidential immunity hearing in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Todd Blanche, attorney for President Trump, sent the judge a pre-motion letter, affirmation, notice of motion, and a 48-page motion. The judge said the pre-motion letter was accepted but not the motion.

“Nothing should be filed with the Court, redacted or otherwise,” the judge clarified via email.

In another recent example, defense attorneys had accused prosecutors of discovery violations, and the related correspondence was made public days after it happened, and initially through a prosecution court filing that the defense argued had “mischaracterized” the situation.

“The prosecutorial misconduct and discovery violations described in President Trump’s pre-motion letter and the enclosed motion, which have come to light only recently, should not be shielded from public view or summarily, and wrongfully, rejected by the Court without consideration,” the proposed motion reads.

They cited previous court opinions that found that most criminal case proceedings happen pretrial, and must not take place only behind closed doors.

Public Trial

The defense argued that President Trump has First Amendment, Sixth Amendment, due process, and statutory grounds to demand a public trial.

“Court papers are public records,” the defense argued, citing state judiciary rules.

They added that the prosecution has said much the same. During an April 2023 press conference, Mr. Bragg stated that the case would be litigated “in a public courtroom.”

“Since that time, however, the public has been shielded from important communications and rulings bearing on the conduct of this case,” the proposed motion reads.  Previous cases have found that public scrutiny and even “intense” media coverage are not reasons to keep proceedings sealed.

The defense noted that the judge has not specified whether all files, including court correspondence, will be made public record at a later time. They requested that they all be made public “promptly.”

President Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up “hush money” paid to two women accusers. Prosecutors argue that this was a scheme to influence the 2016 elections. President Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts.

The investigation had risen out of public claims made by Michael Cohen, who was a personal attorney to President Trump and later became a vocal critic of his former employer.

The judge also allowed for expert testimony to explain FEC rules to a jury, and prohibited President Trump from arguing at trial several points related to the allegations that the case is part of the “election interference” series of cases the former president says has been waged upon him in a “witch hunt.”

He will be prohibited from arguing that his case was “novel, unusual, or unprecedented,” “making argument about pre-indictment delay,” introducing evidence regarding “purported motivations” of the prosecutors, arguing that he is facing “punishment or other consequences” as a result of the case and trial, and “making an argument or introducing evidence regarding the alleged bias of the court and court staff.”

In a civil trial against President Trump in New York from October 2023 to January, President Trump often made these sorts of statements outside the courtroom to the press.