‘Unusual order’ barring J6 commuted defendants from DC, Capitol raises constitutional implications: expert

An order barring entry to commuted defendants on January 6 Washington, D.C., and the US Capitol could raise constitutional challenges, legal expert says.

In a Friday filing, Judge Amit P. Mehta specified the order applied to “defendants Stewart Rhodes, Kelly Meggs, Kenneth Harrelson, Jessica Watkins, Roberto Minuta, Edward Vallejo, David Moerchel and Joseph Hacket,” whose sentences were switched. Those pardoned are not subject to the order.

Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, was previously seen in the Capitol complex’s Longworth House office building. he was convicted of seditious conspiracy.

PRO-LIFE PROTESTERS FORGIVEN BY TRUMP, FOX CONFIRMS

The order states: “You must not knowingly enter the District of Columbia without first obtaining permission from the Court.” It adds: “You should not knowingly enter the United States Capitol Building or the surrounding grounds known as Capitol Square.”

The filing says the order goes into effect starting Friday at noon. Later that day, the Justice Department filed a motion seeking to lift the order.

“If a judge decided that Jim Biden, General Mark Milley or another individual would be prohibited from visiting the United States capital, even after receiving a last-minute preemptive pardon from the former president, I believe most Americans would object. “The people referenced in our have had their sentences commuted, period, end of sentence,” Acting U.S. Attorney Edward Martin said in a statement.

“This is a very unusual order,” Jonathan Turley, a Fox News Media contributor and Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, told Fox News Digital. “The judge relies on the fact that the sentences were commuted, but the defendants did not receive a full pardon.”

SWITCHED JANUARY. 6 DEFENDANTS SHOWN FROM D.C., CAPITOL BUILDING BY FEDERAL JUDGE

Ron Coleman, an attorney with Dhillon Law Group, called the order “novel.”

“It is unclear what basis the court would have for asserting jurisdiction over someone who has been pardoned for the conviction that is presumably the basis of the order or what the legal grounds are for making Washington, D.C., the type of national capital, like Moscow in the former USSR, that a citizen needs permission to enter,” Coleman said.

NANCY PELOSI slams Trump’s ‘shameful’ January pardons 6 DEFENDANTS

Turley said that although the new order could “be a factor” in President Donald Trump By extending a full pardon to those with commuted sentences, “it is unclear whether an order will prompt Trump to reconsider his decision to offer only commutations.”

Turley noted that the order could increase constitutional challengesincluding First Amendment implications.

“I believe the court is effectively preventing these individuals from associating or petitioning government officials without prior court approval,” Turley said. “That could raise questions under the First Amendment.

“I hope these individuals question this.”

Trump pardoned nearly everyone charged with Jan. 6 earlier this week after promising to do so at his inaugural parade.

DOJ CONSIDERING CHARGING 200 MORE PEOPLE 4 YEARS AFTER JANUARY. 6 ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL

Trump signed on Monday Release of more than 1,500 people accused of crimes. of the January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol. The order required the Federal Bureau of Prisons to act immediately upon receiving the pardons.

Among those pardoned in his initial order was Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys president who was facing a 22-year prison sentence for seditious conspiracy.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News’ David Spunt, Diana Stancy and Jamie Joseph contributed to this report.