President Donald Trump's decision to pardon over 1,500 January 6 defendants has sparked a wave of critical responses from federal judges.
According to The Daily Caller, multiple federal judges in Washington, D.C. have issued strongly worded dismissal orders, expressing their disapproval while acknowledging they must comply with the presidential pardons.
Judge Beryl Howell led the judicial pushback by challenging what she termed "revisionist myth" in the presidential pronouncement. Her comments came during the dismissal of cases against Proud Boy leader Nicholas Ochs and Nicholas Decarlo, both previously sentenced to four years in prison for their roles in the Capitol riot.
Judge Tanya Chutkan, who previously presided over Trump's criminal case in Washington, D.C., joined in the criticism through her own dismissal order.
The judges' responses reflect a coordinated effort to preserve the historical record of the January 6 events. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly emphasized that pardons cannot alter the documented truth of that day. She highlighted the existence of thousands of videos, trial transcripts, and judicial opinions that provide an immutable record of events. The preservation of these records serves as a counterweight to any attempts at historical revisionism.
The dismissal orders addressed various cases, including that of Dominic Box, who was found guilty on six counts for being among the first to breach the Capitol. Box had been scheduled for sentencing on February 21. John Banuelos, charged with discharging a firearm outside the Capitol, also had his case dismissed under the blanket pardon.
Judge Howell stated:
[T]his Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement. 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.
Trump's pardons fulfilled a campaign promise he made repeatedly, including his December statement to NBC News about taking action on his first day in office.
The move follows former President Joe Biden's last-minute preemptive pardons for January 6 committee members, including former Republican Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, as well as his family members, Dr. Anthony Fauci and General Mark Milley.
The extensive use of pardon powers by both presidents has sparked discussions about executive authority and its implications for justice. Trump's mass pardons particularly affected cases in various stages of prosecution, from pending trials to post-conviction proceedings. The dismissals have impacted numerous ongoing investigations and legal proceedings related to the Capitol riot.
The federal judiciary's response to Trump's pardons represents a significant moment in American legal history. The judges' statements reflect their determination to maintain an accurate historical record while acknowledging the constitutional limits of their authority. These dismissal orders may serve as precedential documents for future cases involving presidential pardons.
The mass pardons have effectively concluded hundreds of January 6 cases, marking a dramatic shift in the legal aftermath of the Capitol riot.
While the pardons have legally absolved the defendants, the judges' carefully worded dismissal orders ensure that their perspectives on the events and their constitutional significance remain part of the permanent judicial record.
