‘Unusual order’ barring commuted J6 defendants from DC, Capitol raises constitutional implications: expert
A recent order barring commuted Jan. 6 defendants from entering Washington, D.C., and the U.S. Capitol has raised concerns over potential constitutional challenges, according to legal experts. The order, issued by Judge Amit P. Mehta, specifically applies to individuals whose sentences were commuted, including Stewart Rhodes, Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins, Roberto Minuta, Edward Vallejo, David Moerchel, and Joseph Hacket. Those who were granted full pardons are not subject to the order.
Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, was previously spotted in the Longworth House Office Building within the Capitol complex and was convicted of seditious conspiracy. The order explicitly states that these individuals must not enter Washington, D.C., or the U.S. Capitol without prior permission from the court.
Acting U.S. Attorney Edward Martin expressed concerns about the unusual nature of the order, highlighting that the defendants had their sentences commuted and should not be restricted from visiting the nation’s capital. Jonathan Turley, a legal expert and Fox News Media contributor, also questioned the basis for the court’s jurisdiction over individuals who have been pardoned.
Ron Coleman, counsel at Dhillon Law Group, described the order as “novel” and raised questions about the legal grounds for restricting individuals from entering Washington, D.C. He compared the situation to a scenario where prominent figures like Jim Biden or General Mark Milley were barred from visiting the nation’s capital.
Turley emphasized that the order could have implications for the defendants’ First Amendment rights, as it restricts their ability to associate or petition government officials without court approval. He anticipated that the order would likely be challenged by the affected individuals.
President Donald Trump recently pardoned nearly all Jan. 6 defendants after promising to do so during his inaugural parade. The order required the immediate release of over 1,500 individuals charged in connection with the Capitol attack. Among those pardoned was Enrique Tarrio, the former chairman of the Proud Boys, who faced a lengthy prison sentence for seditious conspiracy.
As the legal community grapples with the implications of the order barring commuted Jan. 6 defendants from entering Washington, D.C., and the U.S. Capitol, the debate over constitutional rights and presidential pardon powers continues to unfold. The ongoing legal challenges and potential court battles underscore the complex legal landscape surrounding the aftermath of the Capitol insurrection.
