Last Updated on January 24, 2025
Federal judges in the District of Columbia are expressing disdain for President Trump’s J6 pardons and are threatening to resist DOJ requests to dismiss open cases.
It is not surprising that judges in Washington, D.C. who have been involved in the trials of supporters of former President Trump are strongly opposed to the pardons and sentence reductions he issued on his first day in office. They expressed their dismay after the Department of Justice under Trump’s administration requested that the judges drop cases that were still ongoing.
Trump’s pardons, which were announced on January 20, were among the first official actions he took as President. They provided unconditional clemency to more than 1,500 individuals who participated in the J6 protests, some of whom were convicted for simply entering the Capitol building. For example, Enrique Tarrio, a leader of the Proud Boys, received a 22-year sentence for seditious conspiracy even though he was not present at the Capitol on that day.
Judge Tanya Chutkan, who presided over a case related to Trump’s alleged interference in the federal election led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, criticized the pardons. She argued that Trump cannot erase the violence, chaos, and fear that the mob had caused in its aftermath.
The “insurrection”, as it was framed by progressives, left three Trump supporters dead, including Rosanne Boyle, whose unconscious body was repeatedly beaten by police on the Capitol steps.
Chutkan argued that the pardons “cannot change the tragic truth of what happened on January 6, 2021,” nor could they “repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.” D.C. district judges, Chutkan claimed in her statement, delivered justice to J6 defendants – devoid of political bias.
Judge Beryl Howell, who served as the chief District Court judge and presided over Rudy Giuliani’s defamation trial, also rejected the request to dismiss charges. She argued that no “process of national reconciliation” could begin if those who disrupted a constitutionally mandated proceeding in Congress were “glorified” and allowed to go “unpunished”.
Howell claimed that dismissing charges or issuing pardons would send a dangerous message, promoting future lawlessness and eroding the rule of law.
”This presidential pronouncement of a ‘national injustice’ is the sole justification provided in the government’s motion to dismiss the pending indictment,” Howell argued. “This Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.”
Judge Amy Berman Jackson voiced similar sentiments, arguing that permanently dropping charges against a “rioter” would dishonor the real “patriots”, the police who met protestors with rubber bullets and gas munitions, that “defended the Capitol” that day.
By Tuesday morning, more than 200 J6ers who had remained in federal custody were released, while Trump’s Justice Department began filing motions to dismiss charges for hundreds of others still facing legal action.
In a January 22 interview with Fox News, President Trump explained his reasoning for the pardons. “They were treated like the worst criminals in history. And you know what they were there for? They were protesting the vote, because they knew the election was rigged.” He added that “most of the people were absolutely innocent” pointing out that the lengthy sentences in no way matched the alleged crimes.
National File has consistently covered the egregious treatment of the J6 defendants by D.C. judges. Despite judges who don’t want to release their political prisoners, the people voted overwhelmingly for President Trump – not them – to do exactly what he has already started to do. Promises made. Promises kept.
