Judge dismisses final Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy case after DOJ withdrawal
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 dismissed the remaining seditious conspiracy charges against Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes and other members after the Justice Department moved to drop the case, prompting former prosecutors to warn against downplaying the Jan. 6 attack.
A U.S. district judge in California has dismissed the last seditious conspiracy case against Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, and several other members of the group. The decision follows the Justice Department’s request to abandon the prosecution, which had previously secured convictions for attempting to overthrow the government during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Rhodes had been sentenced to 18 years in prison after a jury found him and five associates guilty of using force to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. In an order dated Aug. 4, the judge expressed concern that ending the case “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.”
James Lee Bright, Rhodes’s attorney, posted on social media that the seditious-conspiracy charge “should never have been charged,” describing it as a “thought crime.”
The dismissal comes as three former federal prosecutors who handled Jan. 6 cases testified before the Senate, urging lawmakers not to confirm judicial nominees who question the facts of the Capitol attack. Former prosecutor Michael Romano said the issue should not be partisan, adding that it has become contentious because “Donald Trump insists people lie or not tell the truth about what happened that day.”
Senator Richard Blumenthal criticized nominees who avoid answering whether Trump lost the 2020 election, warning that such evasiveness could undermine judicial independence. The White House defended its nominees, stating they have undergone a “rigorous vetting process” and are “highly qualified.”
Former prosecutor Brendan Ballou warned that it is “scary” to imagine future election disputes being decided by judges who may be reluctant to confront the facts of Jan. 6.