posted by Automatik
Prior restraint, blatently unconsitutional, no big deal.
I think the cease and desist comes off as desperate and it makes it look like the book has more to reveal. I think reality is the worst came out, so I am not sure why Trump is doing this other than he has an ego. There has been 100000000x worse reported on him, and it really didn't do much damage. Not to mention the people who want to read it to get their TDS porn will do so, and the people who want to defend him saying the book is inaccurate will also do so. It already is happening. I would have just taken the "L" and let his people defend him , which they are already doing (even CNN is picking up on some inaccuracies of the book). The optics of it all comes off as terrible, but that is par for the course for this current administration. They could solve world hunger and would fuck it up with a Trump tweet.
That being said, I am not lawyer, but I am pretty sure a cease and desist is not unconstitutional. In most cases it is a scare tactic, but it's a letter that pretty much says "hey stop doing (insert alleged* illegal activity) or we will take action." In this case Trump is claiming libel/defamation and is threatening to sue if the book continues to be distributed. It gets murky, because it IS unconstitional for the government prevent any type of publication (i.e. the prior restraint supreme court decision referenced by the author's lawyer), but that is not what a cease and desist is doing. The letter is pretty standard, and I can only imagine how many are sent to most media companies every year. There were plenty (and there will be plenty in the future) of cease and desist letters sent during the election for certain political ads.
*I bolded alleged so there is no butt hurt, because the claims of defamation debatable.