An Indian-born federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama has dismissed J6-related criminal charges against eight members of the Oath Keepers — and was clearly cut up about it.
U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta, who oversaw the defendants’ seditious conspiracy trials in 2022 and 2023, made no secret that he issued the order on Tuesday “reluctantly” and fretted that the dismissal “bestows upon [the defendants] unearned grace by wiping their records clean.”
‘That is not in the public interest.’
Mehta also complained that “today’s epilogue diminishes the gravity of [Jan. 6, 2021], 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.”
In connection to their involvement in the Jan. 6 melee at the U.S. Capitol, Stewart Rhodes, Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins, Roberto Minuta, Joseph Hackett, David Moerschel, and Edward Vallejo were all convicted of obstructing an official proceeding.
All but Rhodes were convicted of conspiracy to prevent members of Congress from discharging their duties. All but Rhodes and Harrelson were convicted of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. All but Watkins and Harrelson were convicted of seditious conspiracy.
In April, the Trump Justice Department moved to vacate the Oath Keepers’ convictions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The circuit court granted the motion on May 21 and remanded the case back to the district court, where a day later, federal prosecutors requested that Mehta formally dismiss with prejudice the militiamen’s criminal case.
Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes. BRYAN DOZIER/Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images.
The motion stated that the government had “determined … that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice.”
Mehta initially declined to oblige the government until he was provided with additional information, claiming that he was “not satisfied” with prosecutors’ “bare-boned justification” for the dismissal.
Prosecutors apparently delivered the goods, to Mehta’s chagrin.
The Obama judge noted that the government did not claim among its justifications for dismissal that the charges were legally deficient, that the evidence to sustain the convictions was insufficient, that there was prosecutorial misconduct, or that there was “any legal error that resulted in an unfair trial or a wrongful conviction.”
“Remarkably, then, the government does not maintain that dismissal is in the public interest to rectify a fundamental error or grave injustice,” wrote Mehta. “Its lead argument is rather that dismissal is appropriate to protect Defendants from harassment.”
Mehta complained that the dismissal would “erase the legal judgments that these Defendants broke the criminal law. And not just any criminal law — laws aimed at punishing those who conspire to commit extralegal violence to prevent the execution of the laws or the carrying out of official duties. … The government thus asks to absolve these Defendants of crimes against the United States itself. In this court’s view, that is not in the public interest.”
The Obama judge admitted, however, that his opinion in this matter is worthless, that he “cannot write a different ending,” and that he lacks the authority “to deny a prosecutor’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution’s exercise of its charging authority.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
J6, Oath keepers, Barack obama, District court, Politics
