The Justice Department asks an appeals court to remove seditious conspiracy convictions for top Jan. 6 planners, extending clemency beyond commutations.
A new court fight is rekindling outrage over how the Trump administration is treating people convicted in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, with the Justice Department now seeking to erase the most serious convictions from public criminal records.
On April 14. 2026. the Justice Department filed papers with a federal appeals court asking it to remove “seditious conspiracy” convictions from the criminal records of a dozen rioters accused of planning the Jan.. 6 insurrection.. Prosecutors had argued these convictions reflected the most consequential charges brought after the attack. targeting alleged masterminds rather than only those who entered the Capitol during the riot.
The request focuses on defendants whose sentences were previously commuted.. The DOJ’s new move. however. goes further than sentence changes: it asks the court to wipe the convictions themselves clean from the defendants’ records.. In legal and practical terms. a record-erasure effort can affect how the cases follow people long after they leave prison—an issue that looms heavily for victims and survivors who say the harm inflicted by the attack should not fade from the public record.
The same day, in a different case, DOJ also submitted filings indicating another Jan.. 6 defendant. David Daniel. intends to plead guilty to sexually abusing two children. including one under age 12. as well as possessing child pornography.. Daniel’s situation is particularly stark because he was already pardoned early in the Trump administration’s return to office in January 2025.
Daniel’s pardon came after a magistrate judge earlier described the government’s evidence as “compelling. ” including allegations that Daniel engaged in sexual acts involving two young girls and took and kept photos of the victims’ genitalia.. Later, investigators confirmed that explicit images involving both minors were found on his electronic devices.. After Trump’s inauguration. the White House characterized Daniel’s clemency as “a full. complete and unconditional pardon. ” even as the defendant remained in jail under the magistrate’s orders and the court noted concerns about flight risk.
Daniel is not portrayed as an isolated case in the broader pattern now under scrutiny.. Roughly 40 people connected to Jan.. 6 have been rearrested. charged. or sentenced for conduct not directly tied to the Capitol attack. according to reporting referenced in the underlying material.. Within that group, at least 12 were arrested after receiving Trump’s pardons.
The list of later alleged conduct is wide-ranging and includes. among other things. sex crimes involving children. drunk driving incidents—including cases where prosecutors allege fatal crashes—illegal weapons possession. and rape.. Separate investigative reporting highlighted how some of these cases involve children and how a subset includes severe violent allegations.
The question behind the legal filings is not only whether punishment followed Jan.. 6, but whether clemency extended protection in ways that changed incentives and public safety calculations.. In the days after Trump returned to office. NPR reported that pardoned rioters were posting increasingly dire threats online toward prosecutors. FBI agents. and Capitol law enforcement—an atmosphere in which at least one official told the outlet many targets believed they would not be taken seriously unless violence occurred.
Officials and court-watchers have pointed to that reality as a reason victims and law enforcement supporters feared pardons could embolden additional misconduct.. Julie Farnam. described in the underlying material as having served as assistant director of Intelligence for the Capitol Police on Jan.. 6. said the pardons removed reasons for bad actors to “play by the book.” Her concern was that clemency could be interpreted as immunity. particularly for politically motivated violence.
That fear has been woven into the government’s handling of other cases involving serious alleged violence.. One prominent example cited in the material is Edward Kelley, who was awaiting trial for Jan.. 6-related crimes and, according to prosecutors, compiled a “kill list” of roughly 40 FBI agents and others working on his case.. Prosecutors said he formed a militia-like group. conducted combat drills. and planned attacks using car bombs and drones. including targeting locations such as movie theaters.. Kelley’s legal team argued that a presidential pardon should extend to his murder plot.
In that particular matter. Trump and the DOJ did not repardon him for the alleged murderous scheme. and Kelley was sentenced to life in prison in July 2025.. Yet the broader clemency record described in the material suggests the administration has treated different cases in different ways. leaving victims to reconcile what accountability is supposed to look like after pardon.
Other examples described include Dan Wilson. who was convicted of a felony before the insurrection and later faced charges tied to illegal possession of firearms and ammunition discovered during the Jan.. 6 investigation.. The Trump pardon extended to the gun charges in that case. with Wilson’s attorney arguing the decision undermined the conviction tied to the investigation.. Another example involves Susan Ellen Kaye. who was sentenced to 18 months for a social-media message threatening FBI agents; the DOJ dropped charges in connection with her case. again according to the underlying account.
The administration’s approach also intersects with concerns about how victims experience clemency in real time—especially when those convicted of threatening violence or planning it are released from prison.. The material points to public statements from victims and family members who describe living with uncertainty after pardons.
Stewart Rhodes, described as the Oath Keepers leader, is central to the new record-erasure fight.. Rhodes was convicted of seditious conspiracy and sentenced to 18 years.. The new DOJ request would seek to erase convictions for other Proud Boys and Oath Keepers defendants who were convicted of the planning charges. even though some had already seen sentences commuted.
The underlying material also recounts how Rhodes met with several Republican senators after leaving prison. and how his ex-wife. Tasha Adams. described long-running abuse and the fear that accompanied the possibility of release.. Adams is portrayed as having warned the government before the election about the threat Rhodes could pose. describing a “kill list” concern in interviews and reporting.. Weeks before the election, she told another outlet that she expected to be on a list, including for her children.
As the clemency debate broadens. the material ties it to a set of policy decisions and court actions beyond single cases.. It notes that Trump’s early clemency toward people connected to Jan.. 6 came alongside broader choices about how financial penalties and obligations are treated.. It also references claims about efforts by the DOJ to seek reimbursement or reduce consequences linked to convictions.
The impact of such decisions. however. is felt most sharply by those harmed—people who say that removing convictions and. in some cases. releasing individuals after serious charges communicates something about what the government values.. The material emphasizes that victims sometimes encountered additional dangers after pardons. including cases where defendants later faced serious criminal charges such as kidnapping. sexual assault. and killings.
One case highlighted is John Emanuel Banuelos, described as having fired an illegal weapon into the air on Jan.. 6 and later being linked to the fatal stabbing of a young man in a Salt Lake City park.. The material says he was arrested and charged in October 2025 with aggravated kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault. and that DNA evidence tied him to a separate 2018 assault.. It also notes that Banuelos was eventually pardoned under Trump’s order.
Another case described involves Emily Hernandez, who was sentenced to 10 years for a drunk driving incident that allegedly killed a mother of two. The narrative notes her sentencing occurred after she had been pardoned less than two weeks earlier.
These stories underscore how the DOJ’s April 14 request is being framed in the public debate: not simply as a legal housekeeping move for defendants, but as an extension of presidential clemency that some view as undermining accountability for the Jan. 6 attack and its long shadow.
While federal courts will decide whether the appeals court can erase these “seditious conspiracy” convictions. the filings signal that the fight over Jan.. 6—once centered on who entered the Capitol and who was convicted—now also centers on what remains on the record. what is removed. and what victims believe that shift means for safety and justice going forward.
Misryoum
Jan. 6 pardons DOJ record erasure seditious conspiracy Capitol insurrection prosecutions Stewart Rhodes Trump justice policy