District of Columbia Lacks Standing to Sue Oath Keepers and Proud Boys for Jan. 6, Defense Attorney Says

The District of Columbia’s civil suit versus the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, and 37 private accuseds stopsworking for absence of standing, a defense lawyer stated Monday.

“We puton’t think that they have jurisdiction to takelegalactionagainst,” lawyer Jonathon Moseley, who represents Oath Keepers leader Kelly Meggs, informed The Epoch Times. “They puton’t have standing to takelegalactionagainst on behalf of the specific cops officers. They wear’t have jurisdiction to takelegalactionagainst for what occurred on federal land.”

On April 1, District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine revealed an growth (pdf) of the district’s December 2021 claim to consistof Oath Keepers creator Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, 4 person Oath Keepers, and one member of the Proud Boys.

The match looksfor to lay the blame for Jan. 6 violence at the U.S. Capitol on an declared conspiracy inbetween the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys and intends to hold the offenders economically accountable for the discontent.

In March, Moseley and lawyer Juli Z. Haller submitted a movement (pdf) priorto U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta to dismiss the suit for absence of structure. Haller represents accused Connie Meggs, betterhalf of Kelly Meggs.

The District of Columbia’s legal filings “implausibly lookfor to make all offenders in this case accountable for the steppingin, independent, badguy acts of others who presumably devoted treacherous acts whether purposefully or negligently,” the movement checksout, “whereas complainant stopsworking to plead that these private offenders triggered any of these acts or devoted any injuries.”

oath keepers
Members of the Oath Keepers are seen throughout a demonstration versus the accreditation of the 2020 U.S. governmental election results by the U.S. Congress, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6,2021 (Jim Bourg/Reuters)

The 119-page modified match obtains greatly from lots of criminal problems submitted in U.S. District Court versus members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys.

“We submitted this claim to hold groups and people that conspired to attack the Capitol, attack our law enforcement officers, and intimidate our neighborhood responsible for their ruthless and hazardous actions on January 6,” Racine stated in a declaration.

“Over the last coupleof months, we have foundout more about the scaries of January 6—including more about how the leaders of the 2 groups behind the attack prompted members to usage violence to reverse the result of a legal governmental election,” Racine stated. “We are lookingfor justice for the District, our democracy, and the brave law enforcement officers who rantheriskof their lives that day.”

Some 2 lots members of the Oath Keepers—an association of existing and previous military, law enforcement, and veryfirst responders—have been criminally charged for an declared plot to attack the Capitol. Oath Keepers creator Rhodes was arraigned in January on charges of seditious conspiracy and many other counts.

‘Coordinated Attack of Domestic Terrorism’

The DC suit explains the Oath Keepers as “a militia motion group unified by unwarranted conspiracy theories developing from the concept that the federal federalgovernment hasactually been co-opted by a dubious group that is attempting to strip United States people of their rights.”

The fit’s other target is the Proud Boys, a group previously headed by Enrique Tarrio of Miami, who is likewise under federal indictment.

Based in part on a series of encrypted online talks and other interactions that were gathered by the FBI, the suit declares the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers worked together to strategy “a collaborated attack of domestic terrorism.”

“Defendants and others rioted, broke through cops barriers, and physically required their method into the Capitol,” the match checksout.

“In doing so, they threatened, attacked, and hurt those who attempted to stop them, consistingof officers of the District’s Metropolitan Police Department (‘MPD’), and prompted horror amongst those inside and around the developing, consistingof members of Congress who were discharging the authorities tasks of their workplaces.”

In addition to conspiracy, the suit declares the offenders are guilty of attack, battery, and deliberate infliction of psychological distress.

Moseley stated a significant concern with the claim is that the Jan. 6 occasions and discontent happened on federal land, not on District of Columbia home.

The federal federalgovernment owns and runs the Capitol, the National Mall, and the Ellipse where then-President Donald J. Trump spoke on Jan. 6, 2021.

“I wear’t understand what they’re talking about. I imply, they might state on federal home, perhaps,” Moseley stated. “There wasn’t anything like that on the residentialorcommercialproperty of the District of Columbia. I imply, where was there anything on District of Columbia residentialorcommercialproperty?”

Claims of attack made in the suit absence particular proof and effort to appoint regret to an whole group based on association, according to the movement to dismiss the case.

“The problem does not come close to appropriately declaring that Connie, much less Kelly Meggs, deliberately assisted and abetted attack and battery on the MPD’s staffmembers. It does not even declare who hurt them, much less any ‘affirmative act’ the Meggs supposedly took ‘in furtherance’ of the attack or battery,” the movement stated.

One of the other “broad legal concerns” with the match, Moseley stated, is it disputes with the continuous criminal cases, and possibly includes calling witnesses who threat incriminating themselves in civil court.

“I think it would be a quite strong argument to state these claims have to be put on hold while the criminal cases go forward,” Moseley stated.

The DC Office of Attorney General is getting pro-bono legal aid from the States United Democracy Center; the Anti-Defamation League; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP; and Dechert LLP, according to a declaration from Racine.

Joseph M. Hanneman


M. Hanneman is a pressreporter for The Epoch Times with a focus on the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol attack and its consequences; and basic news in the State of Wisconsin. His work over a almost 40-year profession has appeared in Catholic World Report, the Racine Journal Times, the Wisconsin State Journal and the Chicago Tribune. Reach him at: [email protected]

Source: District of Columbia Lacks Standing to Sue Oath Keepers and Proud Boys for Jan. 6, Defense Attorney Says.

District of Columbia Lacks Standing to Sue Oath Keepers and Proud Boys for Jan. 6, Defense Attorney Says - Click To Share

Other recent press releases

*This is a free press release. All upgraded press releases are ad-free!