President Trump’s decision to pardon hundreds of protesters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — including many accused of assaulting police officers — is dividing House Republicans, with some lawmakers touting the day-one decree and others criticizing it as ill-advised.
Trump’s blanket pardon for roughly 1,500 rioters in the hours after he was sworn into office — particularly his decision to issue a sweeping reprieve rather than assessing the cases individually — shook Washington. Many of Trump’s allies, including Vice President Vance, had said they were in favor of examining the arrests on a case-by-case basis.
The order included pardons for roughly 600 protesters accused of assaulting, resisting or impeding police and commutations for 14 Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders who were charged with sedition.
Some House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and hard-line conservatives— defended Trump this week, contending that it is his right to sign clemencies and deflecting to former President Biden’s controversial decision to issue preemptive pardons to members of his family, which was made public in the final minutes of his presidency. Some celebrated the move.
But a growing number of Republicans in the lower chamber are criticizing the action, wishing that Trump excluded the violent protesters from the pardons and contending that it is an insult to the police officers who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6. They argue that such a move contrasts with the GOP’s core principle of being a champion for law enforcement.
“[I] don’t agree with the pardoning of people that committed violence or even damage to property,” said Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.). “If you climbed in through a window, I think probably you knew what you were doing was against the law, and I don’t think it was appropriate to pardon them.”
Rep. Young Kim (R-Calif.), who represents a battleground district that Biden won in 2020, called Trump’s sweeping pardon an “overreach.”
“There should have been line items and see, does this person deserve pardoning, does this person,” she said. “And then instead of doing a blanket, then I think he would have caught that this person probably does not deserve to be pardoned at this time.”
“It’s an insult to the law enforcement and police officers who work every day to protect our community and individuals like us,” she added. “Especially those of us [who] work in the Capitol, we owe them a debt of gratitude for doing what they do.”
Trump’s blanket pardon for Jan. 6 protesters made good on a long-running campaign promise to grant clemency to the hundreds of protesters charged and convicted or awaiting trial following the 2021 Capitol riot.
But in the lead-up to Trump’s inauguration, those close to the then-president-elect suggested that he would sign the pardons on a case-by-case basis, offering clemency for individuals who were charged for nonviolent crimes while skipping over those who were being prosecuted for violent offenses.
On Jan. 19 — the day before Trump signed the sweeping pardon — Johnson on NBC’s “Meet the Press” said rioters who assaulted law enforcement officers should not receive pardons but peaceful protesters should, calling it a “simple determination.” The week before, Vance on “Fox News Sunday” issued the same stance.
“I think it’s very simple,” Vance said. “Look, if you protested peacefully on January the 6th, and you’ve had Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice treat you like a gang member, you should be pardoned. If you committed violence on that day, obviously you shouldn’t be pardoned. And there’s a little bit of a gray area there.”
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who raised concerns about the blanket pardon, pointed to Vance’s comments.
“I appreciated Vice President Vance’s statement before all this that, you know, we should have been more selective. I think it should’ve been selective at [commutations] or pardoning,” Bacon said. “But to just do a blanket pardon and — it bothers a lot of us.”
“I’m a pro-law enforcement,” he added. “It bothers me because I defend law enforcement and I think those who assaulted cops or vandalized the building should be held accountable.”
Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), who has served in the House since 2009, said protesters who assaulted police officers, vandalized property or entered the chamber to disrupt official proceedings “should have the book thrown at them.”
“But it’s also clear that the vast, vast majority were simply swept up by the mob. They hurt nobody, broke nothing, and have been treated very harshly. So I can see merit in the president’s pardons, but perhaps they should have been a little more carefully scrutinized,” he added.
Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.), who has represented parts of south and central Georgia in the House since 2011, echoed that sentiment, saying the pardons “should have been individually reviewed.”
“I don’t like blanket pardons,” he added. “It gets back into what some of them actually did, that’s why I don’t think it should have been blanket.”
A House Republican who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive topic raised concerns about the GOP’s pro-law enforcement image after the pardons.
“When you say we support law enforcement and then you pardon all the guys who beat the s— out of law enforcement officers, not sure that paints the right picture,” the lawmaker said.
While a rising number of Republicans have come out against the clemencies, a sizable swell is defending Trump, arguing that the pardons are his prerogative as president. Headlining that list is Johnson, who was asked about the GOP’s “back the blue” ethos in light of the pardons.
“Everybody can describe this however they want, the president has the pardon and commutation authority, it’s his decision, and I think what was made clear all along was that peaceful protests and people who engage in that should never be punished,” Johnson said.
“The president’s made his decision,” he added, “I don’t second guess those.”
Johnson and most other Republicans were quick to point to Biden’s decision to issue preemptive pardons to five of his family members, which were announced as the outgoing president walked into the Capitol rotunda for Trump’s inauguration in the final minutes of his presidency.
“It’s a promise made, promise kept, President Trump is true to word,” said Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. “I trust the president that the fact that they’ve done, as I said, they’ve checked into them, they have decided, as he has the authority to do, to pardon those people that deserve to have pardons. I mean, look at Biden and his pardons. Are you kidding me?”
A handful of conservative House Republicans visited the Washington, D.C., jail on Tuesday after Trump signed the pardons, touting the clemencies. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) vowed to offer the released protesters a tour of the Capitol.
“These men have already paid too much time,” Boebert said. “More time than they ever should’ve. They should have never been locked up.”
Asked if he thought it was wrong to pardon the violent protesters, Rep. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.), who reached the rank of lieutenant general in the U.S. Marine Corps, responded, “I’m not gonna second guess the president on that.”
“He came in his first day, he said what he was gonna do, he’s doing it,” he said. “It’s always easy to second guess. I’m not one of those.”
Other House Republicans, meanwhile, are steering clear of the pardon discussion entirely, caught between crossing the president and backing his controversial clemency.
“There’s been a lot of talk about that. What I’m focusing on are the other executive orders that deal with immigration and border security,” said Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R), who represents a battleground district in Arizona, when asked for his reaction to the pardons.
Pressed on whether he had any comment on the clemencies, the second-term lawmaker responded “thank you” as an elevator door closed.
