"I fully intend to vigorously and rigorously enforce the gag orders, ensuring that counsel informs their clients," stated Judge Engoron following the appeals court's ruling.

Christopher Kise, attorney for President Trump, expressed his disappointment with the reinstatement of the gag order, calling it "a tragic day for the rule of law." He reiterated his position in a statement to CBS News.

"In a country where the First Amendment is held sacred, President Trump should be able to comment on why he believes he cannot receive a fair trial," Kise said. "It is difficult to imagine a more unfair process, and it is hard to believe that this is happening in America."

Judge Engoron has consistently defended Greenfield, stating that he relies on her for legal advice and has the right to do so. Lawyers representing Attorney General Letitia James and the New York Office of Court Administration opposed the lifting of the gag order.

In an affidavit, a top court security official, Charles Hollen, stated that transcriptions of threats towards Greenfield and Engoron, since Trump's initial statement on October 3, filled 275 single-spaced pages. Hollen mentioned that the threats included calls to Greenfield's personal cell phone and messages to her personal email account.

Hollen further stated that the threats escalated when the gag order was temporarily lifted, with "approximately half of the harassing and disparaging messages being antisemitic."

Attorneys representing a certain individual argued that the imposition of the order violated constitutional protections for freedom of speech in both the United States and the state of New York. They pointed out that the clerk involved, Allison Greenfield, is affiliated with a particular political party and is in close proximity to the presiding judge, often exchanging notes.

Following the temporary lifting of the gag order on November 16, the aforementioned individual and their aides took to social media to target Greenfield. In a post on the platform X, one of the individual's aides referred to her as a "partisan attack dog." Shortly after, the individual themselves posted a comment stating that she is "biased." Since then, the individual has made multiple posts about Greenfield.

In relation to the ongoing case, the individual, their two adult children, and their company have already been found liable for fraudulent activities. The accusations assert that they illicitly gained a minimum of $250 million over a ten-year period by artificially inflating the individual's net worth during transactions with financial institutions and insurers. The trial is currently focused on unresolved allegations of conspiracy, falsification of business records, and insurance fraud. The former president and the other defendants have consistently denied any wrongdoing, instead attributing any inaccuracies in their financial statements to their accountants.

The individual, who has already testified in court at the request of the state, is expected to be called as a witness once again by their own legal team on December 11. Their lawyers have indicated that the individual will be their final witness.