First Amendment advocates fired back in court late Tuesday after a New York state judge granted President Donald Trump's brother a temporary restraining order halting the publication, printing and distribution of niece Mary Trump's book about the president.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the Association of American Publishers and PEN American Center submitted an amicus brief in Dutchess County Supreme Court opposing Robert Trump's motion for a preliminary injunction.

"Any restraint on publication of the book is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech," the First Amendment groups wrote. "A restraint of just one day is an unacceptable affront to the First Amendment and Article 1, Section 8 of the New York Constitution—a restraint of more than a week, as this court has already ordered, is extraordinary."

Dutchess County Supreme Court Justice Hal Greenwald has set deadlines for both sides' written arguments in the next week, ahead of a planned July 28 publication date for Mary Trump's book, "Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man." Mary Trump and her co-defendant, publisher Simon & Schuster, have each filed a notice of appeal.

Simon & Schuster attorney Elizabeth McNamara of Davis Wright Tremaine emphasized the seriousness of prior restraints in a memorandum Wednesday, arguing Robert Trump has not demonstrated any public harm would come from the publication of the book.

In Robert Trump's complaint, filed Friday, attorney Charles Harder argued Mary Trump is bound by a confidentiality provision in the 2001 settlement agreement tied to her grandfather Fred Trump's will. Harder has argued that the case is not a First Amendment matter and is simply focused on breach of contract.

Simon & Schuster was not involved in the settlement of Fred Trump's will, and McNamara wrote that the publisher was not even aware of the contract until recently.

"There is, therefore, no cause of action asserted against Simon & Schuster and, as a consequence, no likelihood of success," McNamara wrote. "This failure to plead a cause of action bears emphasis—plaintiff is seeking to silence one of the most prominent American publishers without alleging that it engaged in any actual wrongdoing at all."

McNamara also argued the information in the book will not injure the president or Robert Trump, because accounts of the family's complicated relationships and Mary Trump's role in a New York Times report about Trump family taxes have already been published by news outlets.

Mary Trump revealed to Simon & Schuster during a meeting to discuss her book proposal that she was the primary source of the New York Times article, McNamara wrote. Mary Trump's role as the source was later reported by The Daily Beast.

"Learning that, and knowing that no litigation resulted from the NY Times Article, Simon & Schuster was entirely confident in Ms. Trump's ability to tell her story regarding her own family (given that over a year before she worked closely with The New York Times to tell key elements of this story)," McNamara wrote.

Robert Trump's lawsuit was filed shortly after former national security adviser John Bolton was sued by attorneys in the civil division of the U.S. Department of Justice, who sought to block his book about his time in the White House days before publication.

In that case, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth of the District of Columbia found that even though Bolton's book "likely jeopardized national security," the proverbial horse was "out of the barn" because review copies had been widely distributed.

Harder has used the Bolton example to urge the court to act quickly on Mary Trump's book, but McNamara argued that Lamberth's decision demonstrates the high bar required for an injunction. Simon & Schuster is the publisher of both books.

McNamara also argued that Simon & Schuster is also at risk of economic harm if it cannot fulfill purchase orders, which are numerous; the book was ranked first on Amazon's bestseller list as of Wednesday afternoon.

Read more: