The battle between free speech and the pursuit of a fair trial has escalated as a federal judge reinstated a gag order on former President Donald Trump about his criminal election interference case. This ruling has intensified the debate over the limits of constitutional rights in the face of legal proceedings.

The gag order was reimposed by Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court in Washington late Sunday, following a temporary pause. The restrictions prevent Trump from publicly targeting prosecutors, likely witnesses, and members of the court’s staff. “Trump’s appeal is going nowhere,” said Neal Katyal, a former U.S. acting solicitor general in the Obama White House, praising Chutkan’s decision as “excellent” and one that “destroys Trump’s claims.”

During the pause on the gag order, Trump had launched attacks on his last White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and his previous attorney general, William Barr, who are potential witnesses in the case. Trump called Barr “dumb,” “weak,” and a “loser,” further complicating the legal proceedings. In response to Chutkan’s order, Trump took to social media, calling the order “unthinkable” and accusing the judge of being biased.

Trump’s lawyers had sought a more extended stay on the gag order, arguing that it was overly broad and vague and that it amounted to a prior restraint on a leading political candidate. They claimed that any link between Trump’s online attacks and real-world harm to Trump’s targets was an “unsupported conclusion.” Nevertheless, as of Monday, Trump faces active gag orders in two separate cases.

The reinstatement of the gag order on Trump marks a significant development in the federal election case, highlighting the tension between free speech and the need for a fair trial. The outcome of this legal battle will likely set a precedent for how such cases are handled, striking a balance between constitutional rights and the pursuit of justice.