EXCLUSIVE: Trump's DOJ Moves to Toss Jan. 6 Jail Abuse Lawsuit — as Tucker Carlson Interview Fuels New 'Mistreatment of Detainees' Allegations
Donald Trump’s DOJ moves to dismiss a Jan. 6 jail abuse lawsuit as Tucker Carlson’s interview fuels new questions about a federal civil rights investigation.
Nov. 11 2026, Published 5:59 p.m. ET
Donald Trump's Justice Department is fighting to dismiss a federal lawsuit over alleged mistreatment of January 6 detainees at a Washington, D.C., jail, even as government lawyers acknowledge an ongoing civil rights investigation into the facility, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
According to court documents obtained by Radar, federal attorneys filed a motion on November 10 seeking to dismiss a petition brought by an association representing former January 6 detainees, arguing that an existing investigation has already addressed the group's central demand.
DOJ Confirms Investigation Into Jail Conditions
Trump's Justice Department confirms an ongoing civil rights investigation into D.C. jail conditions.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, accuses jail officials of subjecting January 6 defendants to troubling conditions while awaiting trial.
The petition alleges detainees experienced prolonged solitary confinement, extended lockdowns, inadequate medical treatment, denial of religious services, and interference with access to legal counsel.
In a 20-page memorandum supporting its motion to dismiss, DOJ attorneys confirmed that the Civil Rights Division launched an investigation into conditions at D.C. Department of Corrections facilities.
The investigation, announced October 19, examines potential constitutional violations dating back to January 1, 2021, including alleged excessive force, inadequate medical care, unsafe conditions, and insufficient nutrition.
Federal attorneys argued the investigation already covers the period during which January 6 defendants were incarcerated.
Tucker Carlson Interview Fuels New Questions
Attorney Jonathan Gross claims his Tucker Carlson appearance helped spark DOJ scrutiny.
The legal battle has also drawn attention because of attorney Jonathan Gross's appearance on Tucker Carlson's program shortly before the Justice Department announced its investigation.
Gross has publicly suggested that the timing of the announcement was connected to his appearance on Carlson's show.
However, the November 10 court filing does not establish that Carlson's interview prompted federal officials to open the investigation.
The timing nevertheless adds another dimension to a legal dispute involving allegations that January 6 detainees were denied basic constitutional protections.
The DOJ's filing cites an October 19 letter from then-Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon to D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announcing the investigation.
Federal Judge Previously Raised Alarm
Carlson's interview brought renewed attention to alleged mistreatment of January 6 detainees.
The controversy dates back to October 2021, when U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth found two D.C. corrections officials in civil contempt in a case involving January 6 defendant Christopher Worrell.
Lamberth directed the court clerk to forward his order to the attorney general for an appropriate inquiry into potential civil rights violations.
The petitioners argue that the earlier judicial action supports their demand for federal scrutiny. DOJ lawyers countered that the judge's order did not legally require the department to conduct the specific investigation requested.
Trump Administration Demands Dismissal
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Harmeet Dhillon announced the D.C. jail investigation before DOJ moved to dismiss the lawsuit.
Government attorneys advanced three arguments for dismissal: the petitioners cannot compel a discretionary investigation, they lack legal standing, and the ongoing civil rights probe makes their requested relief moot.
"The investigation's nature and scope are precisely what the petition demands," DOJ attorneys wrote. They also argued that Trump's January 2025 pardons and release order mean the association's members are no longer subjected to the alleged jail conditions.
The court has not ruled on the dismissal motion, and the underlying allegations of mistreatment remain disputed.
The case now raises questions about whether the Justice Department's existing investigation satisfies the demands of former January 6 detainees seeking accountability.
