In early March, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly stared at 23-year-old Clifford Mackrell, a Jan. 6 defendant from Ohio, and made a statement warning about the fragility of democracy as she sentenced him to 27 months in prison for his role in the 2021 attack on the United States Capitol.
“We have an election coming,” Kollar-Kotelly stated. “We will destroy democracy unless we protect it.”
Kollar-Kotelly did not raise her voice, but her remarks echoed off the courtroom’s wooden walls, which ran from floor to ceiling.
Three years ago, Mackrell allegedly wrapped his arm around the neck of a US Capitol Police officer and threw him to the ground. Judge Kollar-Kotelly used the term “insurrection” ten times during the hearings. She also mentioned another election, citing the debate surrounding the Supreme Court’s ruling following the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore.
“Many people were very unhappy with (that ruling),” she went on to say. “However, there was a peaceful transition of power. Nobody participated in a rebellion.
The federal crime of rebellion has not charged the individuals involved in the Jan. 6 incident. However, Kollar-Kotelly’s views are part of a rising trend of public remarks by Jan. 6 case judges and witness evidence warning of a threat to democracy as the 2024 election nears.
At the March sentencing hearing for Capitol riot defendant Jeffrey Sabol, Judge Rudolph Contreras addressed Sabol’s allegation that he was “answering the call as a patriotic warrior” on January 6. Contreras then alluded to the fall elections.
“It doesn’t take much imagination to imagine a similar call coming out in the coming months,” Contreras said in an interview. “And the court would be concerned that Mr. Sabol would answer that call in the same way.”
Former President Donald Trump’s campaign promise to issue pardons and release Jan. 6 prisoners from prison if he wins reelection has also influenced some of the arguments and witness testimony in the criminal trials.
Retired US Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, who sustained injuries to his shoulder, hand, and foot while defending the Capitol from mob attacks, has repeatedly testified in court proceedings on January 6. Gonell has interspersed his courtroom statements with references to Trump’s pledges of pardons, as well as accusations that the Jan. 6 defendants are “hostages.”
At a sentencing hearing in late March, Gonell described the defendant as “an attacker, not a victim.”
Gonell continued, “He’s not receiving unjust treatment; he’s neither a political prisoner nor a hostage.” “If they are hostages, who are we as police? “Hostage takers?” Hearing a defendant referred to as a “hostage” is “like a dagger” for the judge, according to Gonell.
Michael Fanone, a former Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Officer, appeared before a House Judiciary subcommittee on March 7 and made various statements regarding threats to democracy as the 2024 election nears.
“We are a government of laws, not men,” Fanone informed Congress.
Fanone, who has also testified at several Jan. 6 criminal prosecutions and hearings, told CBS News that he is growing concerned about Trump’s inclusion of promises to pardon Jan. 6 defendants in his campaign rallies.
“It’s inciteful language,” Fanone told CBS News. “If he succeeds and holds office again, he’ll weaponize the Department of Justice and use it to go after people like myself.”
Judges call 2020 conspiracy theories “outright distortions and outright falsehoods”
Several judges have raised concerns about the persistent spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories surrounding the events of 2020 and the Capitol siege.
In a scathing critique, Judge Lamberth, who was nominated by President Reagan, took aim at the language employed by Trump during the 2024 election season. This rhetoric has been echoed by several Jan. 6 defendants and their followers. Lamberth emphatically stated, “To portray oneself as a political prisoner and to accuse the court of violating one’s rights is not only factually incorrect, but also deeply offensive. It is imperative that the public recognizes the absurdity of such claims.”
In a recent interview with CNN, District Judge Reggie Walton expressed concern about the increased frequency of threats against him and his fellow judges since January 6. He found it deeply troubling that judges and their families are being targeted with such threats.
“It’s an emerging trend,” he remarked. “Threats were not so common in the past.”
During the interview, Walton expressed concern about the potential harm and negative impact that physical attacks on judges could have.
Defense attorney says warnings are just “old-fashioned fear mongering”
Attorney Joe McBride, a New York defense attorney who has represented several Jan. 6 defendants, criticized the judges’ statements, calling them dangerous, unfair, and lacking evidence. In an interview with CBS News, McBride described the rhetoric as “good, old-fashioned fear mongering.”
During a nightly vigil held outside the Washington, D.C., jail in solidarity with the Jan. 6 defendants, concerns were raised regarding recent public statements made by judges. Mikki Witthoeft, whose daughter Ashli Babbitt tragically lost her life while participating in the breach of the House speaker’s lobby, strongly criticized Judge Rudolph Contreras for his remarks. Witthoeft highlighted Contreras’ cautionary words regarding the potential for future incitement of Trump supporters and expressed her view that for those accused in the Jan. 6 cases, including Donald Trump, the outcome is already determined.
According to Catherine Ross, a law professor at George Washington University, it is crucial that we heed Judge Walton’s warning. She emphasizes that not only have judges on Trump cases faced explicit or implicit threats, but their staff and even their families have been targeted as well.
According to Ross, the preservation of the rule of law and the administration of justice are vital responsibilities of the judiciary branch. These pillars of democracy are greatly threatened when democracy itself is fragile and under attack.
Federal judges continue to make mentions of Trump, even as his own criminal trial has been postponed due to a Supreme Court review of his defense claims of presidential immunity. Originally scheduled to start on March 4th, the trial for his alleged conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election results has been put on hold until the Supreme Court reaches a decision on his immunity claim.
Over 1,069 defendants have faced criminal charges in connection with the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, as reported by the Justice Department. Approximately 561 cases have been resolved and individuals have been sentenced for their involvement in the criminal activities that took place on that day. During a March sentencing hearing in a specific Jan. 6 case, Judge Contreras echoed the sentiments expressed by many of his fellow judges, highlighting the role played by then-President Trump and several influential allies in instigating the unprecedented events of Jan. 6. Contreras emphasized that these individuals bear significant responsibility for the events that unfolded.
