Hello from Judge Royce Lamberth's virtual courtroom, where a plea hearing will start soon for Jacob Chansley, the Arizona man known as the QAnon shaman, who wore horns and facepaint as he posed shirtless on the Senate dais and went around the Capitol s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2105…
The public line for Chansley's hearing just went live, and the automated voice says there are 168 people dialed in so far, which is a number we don't normally see for Jan. 6 hearings. If you'd like to listen:
Toll Free Number: 888-636-3807
Access Code: 6967853
There was a brief moment where the public line was unmuted, someone could be heard yelling "FREEDOM" and then everyone got muted. So that's how this is going so far.
Oh no, it happened again, more cries of "FREEDOM"
Okay, the line is now muted and the plea hearing is underway for Jacob Chansley. It sounds like they may have already started before the line kicked on, Chansley's lawyer Al Watkins is discussing a compentency analysis
Lamberth gives Chansley a chance to address his competency, Chansley says he appreciated the judge allowing an eval of his "mental vulnerabilities" and says he hopes the judge didn't take offense at anything he said in the eval, he just said he hoped the judge was "impartial"
Lamberth says he didn't take offense at anything and thought that what Chansley said was "fairly pleasant." So Chansley's competency to proceed is established and they're going forward
Chansley is pleading guilty to one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, the most serious charge in the indictment. It has a max sentence of 20 years in prison, though Chansley likely faced far less than that to begin with, given lack of criminal history
Chansley has been in pretrial detention since his arrest. His lawyer says they'll continue to press a pending request that he be released while he awaits sentencing
Lamberth discusses that there's a statement of offense laying out what Chansley did in the Capitol on Jan. 6 (we don't have docs yet).
Lamberth asks Chansley: "And that’s what really happened?"
"Yes, your honor," Chansley replies.
Lamberth accepts Chansley's guilty plea, we haven't gotten a description so far of the estimated sentencing guidelines range that he's facing for entering this plea
Re: Chansley's release - Lamberth says the release motion was already filed but it's under seal because of some info in it. Watkins says it has to do with an exhibit attached and he can argue it now without disclosing that info
Watkins, arguing for Chansley's release, notes he voluntarily surrendered on Jan. 9, has not been disruptive in jail, and has been largely held in solitary confinement for 22-23 hours/day
Ah there's the estimated sentencing guidelines range: Chansley is facing 41-51 months in prison as of now, per the prosecutor
The govt is arguing to keep Chansley detained pending sentencing, and noted the estimated sentencing range because it's much higher than the time he's served so far (8 months) + time until sentencing
Watkins argues that keeping Chansley in jail will exacerbate his mental health vulnerabilities. Lamberth isn't going to rule now, saying he'll take the issue under advisement, so Chansley will remain in jail for now
Watkins concluded his remarks by saying the "real truth" of Jan. 6 would be how the justice system "employed patience and compassion" for people with mental health issues
Lamberth sets an in-person sentencing hearing ("One way or another I hope," he says) for Chansley for Nov. 17 at 10am
That's a wrap on Chansley's plea hearing, the judge says he'll rule as quickly as possible on whether to grant Chansley's request to be released pending sentencing
Jacob Chansley — an Ariz. man who became one of the most notorious participants in the Jan. 6 riots after he was photographed storming the Capitol wearing face paint and horns and triumphantly posed shirtless on the Senate dais — pleaded guilty today buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
This explains why Chansley is facing 41-51 months for pleading guilty to the obstruction count, while Paul Hodgkins had a range of 15-21 months for the same charge. Chansley got a +8 enhancement b/c offense involved threatening to injure/cause property damage in order to obstruct
Recall that in arguing to keep Chansley in pretrial detention, the govt said he was eligible despite not being charged with violence because he'd been carrying around a weapon in the Capitol — a flapole with a spear tip
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
New: Defendants in the Jan. 6 Oath Keepers conspiracy case have lost part of their effort to get charges tossed out — no ruling yet on the conspiracy/obstruction counts, but the judge largely rebuffed other challenges s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2106…
The judge rejected challenges to the following charges in the Oath Keepers case:
- entering/remaining in restricted area or building
- destruction of govt property/tampering w/ evidence
The judge does find that defendant Joshua James is entitled to more information about which officer(s) he's accused of assaulting, but his lawyer already acknowledged that getting that info nullifies his motion to dismiss the count altogether
Hello from Judge Thomas Hogan's virtual courtroom, where a plea hearing is about to begin for Jan. 6 defendant Andrew Hatley. Feds confirmed he was there via Life360 cell location data. This is a misdemeanor-only case s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2045…
When Hatley was contacted by an FBI agent shortly after Jan. 6, Hatley "advised he was not sure how much he should say without legal counsel because he could be in a great deal of trouble"
Hatley is pleading guilty to one count of parading, demonstrating, or picketing in the Capitol, a charge that carries a max sentence of 6 months in jail — this is the same class B misdemeanor we've seen in most Jan. 6 plea deals to date
Ethan Nordean and Joseph Biggs, charged in a Jan. 6 Proud Boys conspiracy case, are in court today arguing to be released. The thrust of the defense position is that they're on track for trial, and they argue they cannot prepare given complexity of the case w/ clients behind bars
Judge Timothy Kelly says he's sympathetic to concerns about trial prep — and notes that it's a problem they'll have to address even if he keeps them jailed — but notes that trial prep isn't one of the main factors courts can weigh in deciding whether to order pretrial detention
Nordean's lawyer Nicholas Smith begins by arguing the govt hasn't shown a specific risk that Nordean poses going forward, Kelly stops him to remind Smith they already argued this, the judge disagreed, *and* the DC Circuit upheld the detention decision
In 2016, Trump pitched to skeptical Republicans that even if they didn't like him, they needed him. Why? Judges.
The fight over Texas's 6-week abortion ban showed the lasting impact of Trump's nominees, not just at SCOTUS, but across the federal courts: buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
The justices didn't have to do anything for SB 8 to take effect — they simply didn't disturb a 5th Circuit order, which refused to halt the law and cut off the possibility of an immediate injunction. That three-judge panel featured two Trump nominees. buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
It's not just Texas, and it's not just the 5th Circuit. Trump + Senate Rs deepened conservative majorities in circuits that cover many states trying to restrict abortion access. Some of these judges fast became leading anti-abortion voices on the bench buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…
Now: The 5th Circuit has issued a new order in the SB 8 case brought by abortion providers, and the short version is that it leaves the law in place for now.
This order does a few things:
- First, the 5th Circuit says the state defs (state judges, clerks, medical licensing officials, AG Paxton) win in arguing immunity — they don't enforce SB 8, so they can't be enjoined from doing anything, so they're not proper parties
- Next, there's the matter of antiabortion activist Mark Lee Dickson. Dickson can't claim immunity, and the district judge rejected his other args for dismissal. 5th Circuit says it'll hear his appeal of all that on an expedited basis, and keep the district court case on hold
AG Merrick Garland will be announcing a "civil enforcement action" at 2:30pm. Release doesn't specify what it's about, but @sgurman broke last night that legal action is imminent re: Texas's abortion ban, so stay tuned. Live stream will be here: justice.gov/live
DOJ's "civil enforcement action" presser was set for 2:30pm, live stream page updated to say 2:45pm, now says 3pm. There is a case docketed in WD-TX for United States v. Texas involving a constitutional claim, but nothing to 100% confirm it's about SB 8. So that's where we are.