#dismissed-federal-charges

#dismissed-federal-charges

John Eastman, the attorney who masterminded the legal strategy behind President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, has been officially disbarred in California. This disbarment follows the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol and the subsequent legal repercussions faced by Eastman and other attorneys involved in representing Trump.

The appeals court ruled that a lower court had considered Peters's personal beliefs when deciding upon a punishment, thereby rendering the sentence improper.

The appeals court ruled that the trial judge must clarify whether his injunction interferes with the administration's plans for safety and security, emphasizing the need for a thorough assessment of national security implications.

"What's most problematic is that the extraordinary has become ordinary. It's just a matter of course now that when you issue an opinion that some people don't like, you're going to get threats, you're going to get death threats, and that is obviously problematic on many levels."

U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett dismissed a federal murder charge that had enabled prosecutors to seek capital punishment, finding that it was technically flawed. She wrote that she did so to "foreclose the death penalty as an available punishment to be considered by the jury" as it weighs whether to convict Mangione. Garnett also dismissed a gun charge but left in place stalking charges that carry a maximum punishment of life in prison.

As a practical matter, this would not be possible. The defense lawyer said Mangione will be in court all day and return to jail beyond the hours when he would be able to have a visit with his lawyers. Friedman Agnifilo also said Mangione won't be allowed to look at the questionnaires by himself while in jail, because they'll include potential jurors' identifying information.

The Younger abstention doctrine provides that federal courts are not to interfere with pending state criminal proceedings. The doctrine is rarely invoked in regulatory disputes, but it can block federal courts from intervening when state criminal prosecutions are already underway. If the judge applies it here, the federal case could effectively stall while the state case proceeds.

DHS has alleged that Martinez intentionally ran over a Homeland Security Investigation special agent, causing another agent to fire defensive shots to protect himself, his fellow agents, and the general public.

U.S. District Judge William G. Young ruled Thursday that the government must clearly prove any arrest, detention, or change in immigration status is based on a legitimate reason unrelated to retaliation. Young wrote that any attempt to change the immigration status of plaintiffs in the landmark case against the Trump administration will be presumed to be punishment for speaking out - unless the government can show strong evidence that the action was due to a crime, an expired visa, or another valid reason.

If you are a lawyer, are interested in being an AUSA, and support President Trump and anti-crime agenda, DM me. We need good prosecutors. And DOJ is hiring across the country. Now is your chance to join the mission and do good for our country.- Chad Mizelle (@chad_mizelle) January 31, 2026