On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump granted clemency to a significant number of individuals involved in the Capitol riot.
This decision has prompted state prosecutors to explore possibilities for new charges at the state level, Fox News reported.
More than 1,500 participants of the January 6, 2021, Capitol unrest benefited from President Trump’s sweeping act of clemency on his inauguration day. This pardon has not only freed over 200 people from federal custody but has also ignited a series of debates across the political spectrum.
Philadelphia's District Attorney, Larry Krasner, is one notable prosecutor considering legal grounds for charging some individuals at the state level. Although the federal pardon has released individuals from federal penalties, Krasner’s team is vetting the potential for state charges related to activities such as communications and planning.
Larry Krasner mentioned on CNN, "In many cases, it will be possible to go after people who have been federally pardoned."
In view of multiple incidents where individuals pardoned had engaged previously in planning through various forms of communication, Larry Krasner emphasized that these acts might pave the way for state charges. He stated, "The focus for most state prosecutors should be what occurred within their jurisdiction. Texting, phone calls, emails, reservations for transportation or hotels. Conspiratorial activity could give rise to a local charge — meaning a state charge — of criminal conspiracy."
Among those pardoned are more than a hundred Pennsylvanians, including a leader of the Proud Boys from Philadelphia and a man from the Pittsburgh area, both of whom had been convicted on serious charges including seditious conspiracy and assault.
The blanket pardons have faced sharp criticism from various political figures. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senator Lisa Murkowski have expressed strong disapproval, particularly for pardoning individuals convicted of violent offenses against law enforcement.
Schumer labels the pardons as undermining democracy, while Murkowski expresses concern about the message they send to law enforcement.
Conversely, House Speaker Mike Johnson and Vice President JD Vance have presented more neutral or supportive stances toward the presidential decision.
The initiative to charge these individuals anew under state laws, however, is fraught with legal complexities. Jurisdictional issues and double jeopardy protections pose significant barriers.
Former U.S. prosecutor Andrew McCarthy has noted these hurdles, highlighting the difficulty of bypassing these established legal protections to bring new state charges related to the same conduct.
Aria Branch from Elias Law Group pointed out the obligation of state law enforcement to uphold the rule of law, regardless of political motives behind Trump’s pardons. She advocates for a thorough review of actions that could constitute state crimes.
The large-scale pardon issued by President Trump has dramatically reshaped the landscape for those involved in the Capitol breach, prompting both legal and public policy debates. While some view the pardons as a closure of a tumultuous chapter, others see it as a precursor to further legal battles on the state level. As the situation unfolds, the nation watches closely how state prosecutors might navigate these complex legal waters.
