In Trump’s case, he is being accused primarily of unlawful possession of allegedly classified material.

But because he has been charged under the Espionage Act, many people have been misled into believing the accusations against him have something to do with espionage, spying or even treason.

The use of the term espionage is extremely prejudicial to Trump in the court of public opinion. It would be even more prejudicial in a court of law if the jury were to hear that word in connection with his case.

Accordingly, Trump’s lawyers should immediately move for what’s called a motion in limine prohibiting the use of the word espionage by prosecutors, either inside the courtroom or outside it, but especially in front of the jury.

[Maybe, but I suspect this cuts the other way. Prosecutors may already want to avoid using the term “Espionage Act,” as it raises the expectations of jurors that the law is about actual espionage. Trump’s attorneys will have a much more effective argument in using the term to underscore what the intent of the law was and how the special counsel’s case doesn’t come close to “espionage.” That argument is already succeeding in the court of public opinion, and I’d bet that it would play the same way in court. — Ed]