Crime & high-profile cases
The 1920s Law Shaping the Trump Gag Order
11 min
Current debates over judicial gag orders are leaning on a century-old 'contempt of court' framework designed for a pre-internet era. We look at why New York's specific statutory history makes this case different from federal precedents.
Listen on the app, request early access:
Show notes
New York Judiciary Law Seven Fifty limits criminal contempt to a specific list of acts and no others.
Judges must fit modern social media harassment into a legal framework codified in nineteen hundred and nine.
New York courts lack the broad authority federal judges have to protect the administration of justice.
Financial penalties for contempt in New York are capped at a maximum of one thousand dollars per violation.
Appellate courts often strike down gag orders for exceeding statutory authority rather than violating constitutional rights.
The phrase and no others prevents New York judges from creating new contempt categories for digital behaviors.
In this episode
- 1Intro1 min
- 2The Statutory Bedrock: Judiciary Law Seven Fifty3 min
- 3The 'And No Others' Constraint3 min
- 4The Evolution of the 'Lawful Mandate'2 min
- 5Precedent vs. Practice: The Federal Gap2 min
- 6Outro1 min
Fylom generates episodes like this on any topic you're curious about.
Fylom episodes are researched and written by AI. Automated checks help catch inaccuracies, but episodes aren't reviewed by a human and AI can still get things wrong. Treat them as a starting point, not a source of record — more in our accuracy disclaimer.