Reader Comments

The Trump family urged a judge to give them a temporary restraining order against their niece's tell-all book Friday because they want to avoid another situation like John Bolton's memoir

by Gracie Breinl (2020-07-26)

 |  Post Reply

The Trump family urged a judge to give them a temporary restraining order against their niece's tell-all book Friday because they want to avoid another situation like John Bolton's memoir.

Charles Harder, the lawyer for the family said they did not want a repeat of The Room Where It Happened by the president's former national security adviser.

In a legal filing, Harder said a judge ruled that Bolton had breached his White House non-disclosure agreement but so much of the book had already leaked out he could not gag him.

Harder requested a restraining order from a judge in Dutchess County, just north of New York, as soon as possible because Mary's book is due out on July 28th.

Harder noted that Bolton's book was published by Simon & Schuster, the same publishers who have the rights to Mary's book who have cast both as a fight for First Amendment rights.

The bid is brought by Robert Trump on his own behalf and that of Donald and their sister Maryanne Trump Barry.

President Donald Trump's niece Mary Trump is writing a tell-all book which promises to blow the lid off all the family's most closely guarded secrets.

Mary was spotted as she ran errands on Long Island, New York 

The Trump family lost their first attempt to gag the president's niece Mary Trump from writing a tell-all book about them and are now trying again in a different court.

Pictured is Donald Trump alongside siblings Maryanne Trump and Robert Trump in 1990

 Mary is the daughter of the president's brother Fred Jr.

(pictured), who died in 1981 from alcoholism

In his filing Harder said: 'Plaintiff is seeking to avoid the situation presented in the recent case of United States v. Bolton where the court held that even though the government had established that Mr Bolton violated his contractual obligations in publishing his book, no injunction could issue because while the book had not yet been released, it had been distributed and numerous people had access to copies of the book.

'The temporary restraining order Plaintiff seeks will pause matters long enough for the Court to decide the issues raised by Plaintiff's motion. 

'Without such an order, we are concerned that Simon & Schuster (which also published the Bolton book) will take steps to make it impossible to implement a preliminary injunction if one is granted, thereby vitiating Plaintiff's right to injunctive relief that Mary Trump agreed to in the 2001 Settlement Agreement.'

By the time the case of Bolton's book was brought before Judge Royce Lamberth in federal court in Washington D.C.

extracts had already appeared in the Wall St Journal and the New York Times among others.

They revealed that the President offered to do favors for dictators and begged China to help him win the election in November.

The book has proved extremely embarrassing for the President and Bolton went on an extensive media tour to promote it.

So far no extracts of Mary's book have been made public at all, though the description on the listing says it will reveal a 'a nightmare of traumas, destructive relationships, and a tragic combination of neglect and abuse'.

The fresh legal move by the Trumps came after they lost their first bid to block Mary Trump from publishing her account of life in the family, prompted by her and her brother Fred Trump III's bitter battle in 2000 over the president's father Frederick Trump's will.  

A judge at the Queen's Surrogate's Court in New York ruled on Thursday that their application to stop Mary was 'fatally defective' and dismissed it.

Judge Peter J.

Kelly said that his court was the wrong jurisdiction and that any attempt to block her book, titled Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man, has to be done through the Supreme Court instead.

The decision was another embarrassing blow to the Trumps after they had to refile their application because they didn't pay the $45 fee.   

Judge Kelly said that the Trump family filing their motion in his court was 'improper' and 'outside the parameters' of the Surrogate's Court.

Instead it should go through the Supreme Court, which handles civil matters - which is what the Trumps did Friday. 

The president and his siblings said in their new application what they had said earlier in the week - that they would suffer 'irreparable harm' if Mary's book is published.

The book's promotional blurb says that Mary, 55, a psychologist, describes a 'nightmare of traumas, destructive relationships, and a tragic combination of neglect and abuse'. 

In their new application for a temporary restraining order on Mary and publishers Simon & Schuster, they say: 'No amount of monetary damages can ameliorate the loss that will be suffered if Mary Trump is allowed to violate the settlement agreement and publish.'    

They argued that Mary agreed not to write a memoir back in 2001 under the terms of a settlement which resolved a bitter family dispute over the estate of family patriarch Fred Trump Sr.

The agreement said that due to Donald Trump being famous and his sister Maryanne being a federal judge at the time 'the family made the decision collectively to enter into an agreement that would maintain the confidentiality of the family's private matters'. 

Mary's book — titled Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man — is scheduled to be released in July

The application sets up a First Amendment clash with Mary and Simon & Schuster.

Her lawyer Theodore Boutrous has said that the Trumps are 'pursuing this unlawful prior restraint because they do not want the public to know the truth.'

He said: 'The courts will not tolerate this brazen violation of the First Amendment.'

Simon & Schuster's attorneys also said they would fight the case on the First Amendment saying that the Trumps are trying to interfere with the freedom of the press. 

The First Amendment 'unquestionably protects Mary Trump's right to participate in the electoral debate by writing and having her work concerning the President's character and fitness for office,' Simon & Schuster's attorneys argue.

No order 'restraining the publication of a book concerning the President of the United States in an election year should be issued.'  

In their application Friday the Trumps' attorney Charles Harder says that it is not a First Amendment case. 

'Plaintiffs expect Mary Trump and Simon & Schuster to cast this case as a threat to First Amendment rights, but it is not,' he writes.

'The sort of contractual provision signed by Mary Trump, settling a family dispute with an agreement not to discuss her relationship with certain relatives, is routinely enforceable and does not raise any First Amendment implications. 

'The fact that one of those relatives, fifteen years later, ran for and won the Presidency, does not vitiate what was a limited agreement not to publicly discuss Mary Trump's relationship with three specific members of her family.'

Harder also said that the Mary Trump is free to talk about the 'presidential administration' - just not the president.

The agreement does 'not bar Mary Trump from engaging in political expression or public comment on current affairs, including comment about the current presidential administration,' his application said.

'It is limited to barring statements by Mary Trump about her relationship with the Proponents.

No case holds that an otherwise enforceable agreement among family members not to comment about their relationship suddenly violates the First Amendment just because one of those family members later enters politics.'

The Trump vs Trump battle is unlikely to end in a county court in upstate New York; it is almost certain to go to a federal court regardless of the outcome.   

Don't need another one of these: Donald Trump's former national security advisor John Bolton's bestselling book and primetime ABC interview left the president furious.

His lawyers say they want to stop his niece Mary doing the same with their family secrets



Add comment