Judge Blocks Trump’s Jan. 6 Pardons from Protecting Patriot Accused in D.C. Pipe Bomb Case
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A federal judge has denied Brian Cole Jr.’s bid for dismissal, ruling that President Trump’s Jan. 6 pardons only apply to those already convicted, leaving others who stood up for election integrity unprotected.
U.S. District Judge Amir Ali has rejected a request from attorneys representing Brian Cole Jr., refusing to dismiss his criminal case and ruling that former President Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 pardons were “expressly limited” to individuals already convicted of offenses tied to the Capitol events. This decision further narrows the scope of protection for those who answered the call to defend election transparency.
Cole’s legal team argued that his alleged actions—planting pipe bombs outside both the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters on Jan. 5—were closely linked to the political turmoil and protests over the disputed 2020 election. They pointed to statements that Cole traveled to Washington, D.C. to participate in a demonstration challenging questionable election results, maintaining that the pardon should cover him as well.
The Justice Department, continuing its aggressive prosecution of those associated with the Jan. 6 protest, insisted that the pardon does not extend to conduct like Cole’s. Judge Ali sided with the government, writing:
“Even assuming that the conduct Cole is charged with is ‘related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,’ the pardon is expressly limited to people who had been ‘convicted of offenses’ related to those events.”
Cole, who was indicted last year on charges of interstate transportation of explosives and malicious use of explosives, later faced additional terrorism and weapons-of-mass-destruction counts. He has pleaded not guilty. This ruling highlights the ongoing legal risks faced by those who protested for election integrity, even as the government continues to target them.