Gag orders are absolutely NOT unconstitutional and the Supreme Court has considered them. First Amendment considerations are part of the equation.
Another part of the equation is something like the right to have a fair trial. We want to have the trial only happens in court and the jury doesn't hear a bunch of rumors or evidence that will not be presented in court.
I was on a civil suit once and we had to determine if the owner of property was negligent. He was sued after a pretty severe accident occurred.
The judge strictly controlled what the attorney suing him could say....in terms of prior incidents of negligence. I found out afterwards, he had multiple cases of negligence on his property. Every time the attorney got close to a question that would plant that in the jury's mind the judge shut him down hard. The idea being we should decide the case in front of us. (dunno if that is an actual gag order.)
Also defendants in criminal trials routinely have restrictions on their rights.
Gag orders are used all the time, legitimately and nefariously. Often on product recall cases, often on defamation cases, criminal cases, all over the place.
???
Gag orders are routine in criminal cases.
Here's one in a famous a case a decade ago
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-judge-in-clemens-case-issues-gag-order-2010aug23-story.html
And where was the benefit in that case?
Gagging someone is unconstitutional. You cannot stop someone's right to free speech. It is the FIRST amendment for a reason.
Gag orders are absolutely NOT unconstitutional and the Supreme Court has considered them. First Amendment considerations are part of the equation.
Another part of the equation is something like the right to have a fair trial. We want to have the trial only happens in court and the jury doesn't hear a bunch of rumors or evidence that will not be presented in court.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/gag_order
I was on a civil suit once and we had to determine if the owner of property was negligent. He was sued after a pretty severe accident occurred.
The judge strictly controlled what the attorney suing him could say....in terms of prior incidents of negligence. I found out afterwards, he had multiple cases of negligence on his property. Every time the attorney got close to a question that would plant that in the jury's mind the judge shut him down hard. The idea being we should decide the case in front of us. (dunno if that is an actual gag order.)
Also defendants in criminal trials routinely have restrictions on their rights.
Gag orders are used all the time, legitimately and nefariously. Often on product recall cases, often on defamation cases, criminal cases, all over the place.