Cohen Claims Retaliation in Prison Remand, Saying He Was Targeted Over Planned Tell-All Trump Book
In a petition for habeas corpus, Cohen's attorneys said that officials with the federal Bureau of Prisons had conditioned his transition to home confinement on an "unconstitutional demand" that he not engage with "any kind of media" and stay off of social media platforms.
July 21, 2020 at 12:45 PM
5 minute read
Michael Cohen, the former personal attorney to President Donald Trump, asked a Manhattan federal judge late Monday night to order his immediate release from prison, claiming that he had been taken back into custody in retaliation for a planned book detailing his work as the president's fixer.
In a petition for habeas corpus, Cohen's attorneys said that officials with the federal Bureau of Prisons had conditioned his transition to home confinement on an "unconstitutional demand" that he not engage with "any kind of media" and stay off of social media platforms.
Cohen, who had been released on furlough from FCI Otisville because of the COVID-19 pandemic May 21, claimed the requirement was designed to prevent the publication of his tell-all book, which he had been planning to publish in this fall, just ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election.
According to the lawsuit, Cohen's book describes his "first-hand experiences" with Trump "behind closed doors," and includes accounts of "virulently racist remarks" that Trump had allegedly made against Black leaders, including President Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela.
In the lawsuit, Cohen called his jailing an act of "textbook" discrimination that aimed to silence his First Amendment rights and threatened to expose him to serious health problems associated with the virus.
"Respondents' adverse action was likely caused by the fact that Mr. Cohen's speech would cast President Trump in a negative light shortly before the presidential election," his attorneys wrote in a court filing Monday.
"Respondents' abuse of their authority, in an apparent attempt to prevent publication of a book that promises to reveal negative information about the incumbent president, is textbook viewpoint discrimination," they said.
Cohen is represented by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union and the law firm Perry Guha in Manhattan.
The BOP declined to comment Tuesday, citing a policy of not publicly discussing pending litigation. A spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney General William Barr, who was also named in the filing, did not immediately provide comment Tuesday morning.
Monday's petition was the latest development in a saga surrounding Cohen's sentence, after he pleaded guilty in 2018 to tax fraud and lying to Congress about facilitating hush money payments to women who said they'd engaged in extramarital affairs with Trump, allegations that the president had denied.
Cohen, who is serving a three-year prison sentence, was released in May as a result of the BOP's handling of the pandemic. His attorneys said that officials with the BOP had never objected to Cohen's release until he started advertising his book on social media.
According to the filing, Cohen has been held in solitary confinement in Otisville since he was remanded to federal custody following a July 9 meeting at the U.S. Probation Office in Manhattan.
During the meeting, Cohen's attorneys said, he was presented with a location-monitoring program agreement that included a provision barring him from engaging with "print, TV, film, books, or any other form of media/news." It also required him to "communicate with friends and family to exercise discretion in not posting on your behalf or posting any information about you."
"The purpose is to avoid glamorizing or bringing publicity to your status as a sentenced inmate serving a custodial term in the community," the provision said, according to court filings.
The petition said that Cohen and his attorney, Jeffrey Levine, sought to clarify the "broad language" of the agreement with probation officers, who responded that they would run the request "up the chain of command" for a decision. However, Cohen said he never got the chance to sign the agreement and was taken back into custody by U.S. marshals.
According to the filing, Cohen had "pleaded" with officers as he was being handcuffed, asking that he be allowed to sign the agreement, rather than return to prison.
The BOP said through a spokesman July 9 that Cohen had been remanded "as a result of his refusal to consent to the terms of the program," and later issued a second statement saying that he had "declined to agree with all of the terms of the FLM program, most notably electronic monitoring, and as a result, he was returned to a BOP facility for service of his sentence."
In Monday's filing, Cohen's attorneys said the BOP's "pretextual explanations for its conduct are false," and accused the agency of mischaracterizing the nature of the provision.
"The Prior Restraint Provision was not a requirement that Mr. Cohen merely seek 'pre-approval' for media interviews—rather, it was an absolute prohibition on his ability to speak publicly," the filing said. The Prior Restrain Provision is not reasonably related to any legitimate penological purposes."
The case, captioned Cohen v. Barr, has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readTrump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers for Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250