As reported by CNN, a pair of “Trump-appointed federal judges have rejected claims from January 6 defendants that they’re being treated unfairly, because of their conservative politics, compared with left-leaning rioters in Portland, Oregon, in the summer of 2020.” Those to do so include Judges Trevor McFadden and Carl Nichols, who were dealing with the cases of Capitol rioters David Lee Judd and Garrett Miller, respectively. Judd had sought to have McFadden examine prosecution records related to incidents of violence associated with those left-wing riots in hopes of bolstering his claims of unfair treatment.
355 days ago terrorists ransacked the US Capitol and *hours later* 138-of-202 (68%) House republicans voted to make trump a dictator. They tried to finish the rioters’ job and end democracy. Never forget it.
— Bill Pascrell, Jr. (@BillPascrell) December 29, 2021
In response, McFadden — while criticizing the Justice Department’s handling of certain matters related to those left-wing-associated riots — commented as follows this week:
‘Although both Portland and January 6 rioters attacked federal buildings, the Portland defendants primarily attacked at night, meaning that they raged against a largely vacant courthouse… In contrast, the January 6 rioters attacked the Capitol in broad daylight. And many entered it… Their actions endangered hundreds of federal officials in the Capitol complex. Members of Congress cowered under chairs while staffers blockaded themselves in offices, fearing physical attacks from the rioters.’
Two Trump-appointed federal judges have rejected claims from Jan. 6 defendants that they're being treated unfairly because of their conservative politics.
"This alleged conduct is simply not protected by the First Amendment." https://t.co/JiAfzfzHaH
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) December 29, 2021
There’s also the difference that attacking a federal courthouse — many of which are scattered across the U.S. — and attacking the U.S. Capitol building have different ramifications from the outset. While both instances obviously constitute criminal acts, going after a courthouse among many similar ones doesn’t constitute a threat to the very functioning of the government in the United States. That orderly functioning, however, is exactly what the rioters on January 6 were trying to stop. Nichols made a similar point, commenting as follows:
‘The Portland rioters’ conduct, while obviously serious, did not target a proceeding prescribed by the Constitution and established to ensure a peaceful transition of power… Nor did the Portland rioters, unlike those who assailed America’s Capitol in 2021, make it past the buildings’ outer defenses.’
Conversations between Donald Trump and Bill Barr about the 2020 presidential election can help answer questions about how involved Trump was in attempting to overturn the election results. The public deserves to know what they talked about. https://t.co/rq0HH6YsBS
— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) December 29, 2021
These rejections of discrimination claims from Judd and Miller aren’t the only recent losses in court for Capitol rioters. This week, federal Judge Timothy Kelly rejected claims from leaders of the far-right organization known as the Proud Boys that what happened on January 6 could be covered by the First Amendment, and he allowed for the continued usage by prosecutors of felony charges of obstruction of an official proceeding. As Kelly put it, “No matter Defendants’ political motivations or any political message they wished to express, this alleged conduct is simply not protected by the First Amendment.” In all, hundreds of Trump supporters have been charged for their role in the Capitol attack, and the first trials involving actual rioters are approaching.
Make no mistake: Trump’s continued lies about the election and the insurrection are an attack on democracy. https://t.co/FrXLj25XuE
— Citizens for Ethics (@CREWcrew) December 29, 2021