Judge criticizes Trump's Justice Department as he says he has no choice but to dismiss Jan. 6 seditious conspiracy case

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta expressed strong criticism of the Trump administration's Justice Department as he reluctantly dismissed the seditious conspiracy case against members of the far-right Oath Keepers extremist group. The judge stated he had no choice but to grant the administration's request to vacate the convictions.

“

This is the last of the prosecutions seeking to hold accountable those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. That book is now closed.

In his ruling, Mehta decried efforts to rewrite the history of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. He wrote that the government "asks to absolve these Defendants of crimes against the United States itself." The judge noted that this action "diminishes the gravity of that day, denigrates the work of the prosecutors and law enforcement officers who secured these convictions, and excuses criminal acts that caused a centuries-long pillar of our democracy, the peaceful transfer of presidential power, to buckle."

The move Tuesday closes the book on the final Jan. 6 cases that were affected by Republican President Donald Trump's sweeping pardons and commutations issued last year. The Justice Department had acted in April to vacate the convictions of Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and others in the seditious conspiracy case. Rhodes, who did not enter the Capitol on Jan. 6, was released from prison in January 2025 after Trump commuted his 18-year sentence.

“

Today's epilogue diminishes the gravity of that day, denigrates the work of the prosecutors and law enforcement officers who secured these convictions, and excuses criminal acts that caused a centuries-long pillar of our democracy, the peaceful transfer of presidential power, to buckle. The court cannot write a different ending.

Juries had convicted Oath Keepers leaders and members of orchestrating violent plots to stop the peaceful transfer of power following Trump's 2020 election loss. James Lee Bright, an attorney who represented Rhodes, expressed disappointment with the tenor of Mehta's opinion, stating it was "not necessary to inject his personal opinions in such a fashion."

“

disappointed in the tenor of Mehta's opinion, adding that it was "not necessary to inject his personal opinions in such a fashion."