This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.
The Trump administration has dismissed at least three Justice Department prosecutors involved in criminal cases related to the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack, according to two individuals familiar with the situation.
The firings mark the latest in a broader pattern of removals targeting attorneys who have prosecuted cases against Trump supporters or the former president himself, Fox13 reports, citing sources who spoke to The Associated Press.
The fired prosecutors reportedly include two supervisory attorneys who oversaw Capitol riot cases at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, as well as a third line attorney involved in prosecuting individual defendants.
According to the Associated Press, a termination letter issued to one of the attorneys—signed by Attorney General Pam Bondi—did not provide a specific reason for the dismissal, citing only the administration’s constitutional authority under Article II, the reports said.
-Advertisement-
The firings were confirmed by two individuals who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of internal personnel matters. A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment, the reports noted.
These dismissals follow a series of similar actions in recent months. In February, interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin reassigned several key members of the department’s Capitol Siege Section, including prosecutors who had helped secure seditious conspiracy convictions against extremist leaders Stewart Rhodes and Enrique Tarrio.
Earlier, in January, then-acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove terminated roughly two dozen prosecutors who had been hired under the Biden administration for temporary roles related to the January 6 investigations but were later converted to permanent positions after Trump’s 2024 victory. Bove accused the previous administration of engaging in “subversive personnel actions.”
The Department of Justice has not provided a formal explanation for the latest firings, nor has it indicated whether further dismissals are forthcoming, the reports said. It remains unclear whether the decisions were preceded by any internal reviews or if additional prosecutors involved in Capitol riot cases are under investigation.
The firings come amid Trump’s sweeping pardons of more than 1,500 individuals convicted in connection with the January 6 Capitol riot. On his first day back in office, Trump issued pardons or commuted sentences for a wide range of offenses, including trespassing, seditious conspiracy, and assaults on law enforcement officers.
It is still unclear how the dismissal of key prosecutors will impact the remaining open cases related to January 6. Although most individuals charged have either been sentenced or pardoned, several ongoing investigations—particularly those involving broader networks or financial connections—officially remain active.
Earlier this week, the Department of Justice filed suit this week against all 15 federal district court judges in Maryland, challenging an order that imposes a 48-hour pause on any deportations under legal challenge within the state.
The lawsuit marks an extraordinary and unprecedented move, though numerous legal challenges to the Trump administration’s policies have been filed in Maryland federal courts.
“The complaint alleges that Chief Judge George L. Russell III of the U.S. District Court in Maryland issued an ‘unlawful, antidemocratic’ order in May that grants a two-day stay of deportation to any detainee in immigration custody who files a petition for habeas corpus, which is a lawsuit alleging wrongful detention,” the Washington Post reported.
In his standing order, Chief Judge George Russell III explained that the surge in habeas petitions filed on behalf of detained migrants had resulted in hurried judicial decisions.
“The recent influx of habeas petitions concerning alien detainees … that have been filed after normal court hours and on weekends and holidays has created scheduling difficulties and resulted in hurried and frustrating hearings in that obtaining clear and concrete information about the location and status of the petitioners is elusive,” the chief judge wrote, according to the Post.
The Justice Department said that a “sense of frustration and a desire for greater convenience do not give Defendants license to flout the law.”
