A federal judge who oversaw Jan. 6 cases pushed back against President Trump’s sweeping pardons Wednesday, refusing to close two rioters’ cases in a manner that would prevent charges from being filed again.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell wrote in in court filings for Proud Boys Nicholas Ochs and Nicholas DeCarlo that she would not dismiss their cases with prejudice — leaving the door open for charges to be filed against the men in the future.
Howell suggested that agreeing to do so, which would block charges from being filed again, would “let stand the revisionist myth” relayed in Trump’s proclamation granting pardons to nearly all Jan. 6 defendants.
“The prosecutions in this case and others charging defendants for their criminal conduct at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, present no injustice, but instead reflect the diligent work of conscientious public servants, including prosecutors and law enforcement officials, and dedicated defense attorneys, to defend our democracy and rights and preserve our long tradition of peaceful transfers of power — which, until January 6, 2021, served as a model to the world — all while affording those charged every protection guaranteed by our Constitution and the criminal justice system,” Howell wrote.
Trump on Monday granted sweeping pardons to more than 1,500 Jan. 6 defendants, including Ochs and DeCarlo. He also commuted the sentences of 14 Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders charged with sedition to time served.
In his clemency action, the president ordered his Justice Department to seek dismissal with prejudice for all people charged in connection with the Capitol riot that took place on Jan. 6, 2021, as lawmakers sought to certify former President Biden’s election win.
Howell is not the only federal judge in Washington to dismiss Jan. 6 cases without prejudice, denying in part the requests from Trump’s DOJ. U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman, a Clinton appointee, dismissed rioter Vitali Gossjankowski’s case without prejudice but did not divulge his reasoning.
Several judges spoke out against the pardons ahead of Trump’s return to the White House.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, wrote in court filings last month that he had “nothing to say” about Trump’s promised pardons but that the judges who have presided over “hundreds of trials” and read “hundreds of guilty pleas” know that the conduct that day ranged from aimless wandering to efforts to “derail the onward march of American democracy.”
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who oversaw the Oath Keepers conspiracy trials, said at a sentencing that the prospect of the group’s founder, Stewart Rhodes, being pardoned “ought to be frightening to anyone who cares about democracy in this country.” Rhodes had his sentence commuted to time served by Trump and is now out of prison.
Trump, meanwhile, has defended his decision to bestow broad clemency on those who were charged in connection with the riot, which showed little regard for the wide range of offenses among the defendants and has drawn criticism from even those within his party.
“These people have served years of jail, and their lives have been ruined,” Trump said Tuesday night. “They’ve served years in jail, and, if you look at the American public, the American public is tired of it.”
