Grand Jury Rebellion Shocks Justice Department Officials

A Washington, D.C. grand jury just handed the Trump administration a stunning defeat by refusing to indict six Democratic lawmakers accused of sedition, exposing serious questions about prosecutorial overreach and the politicization of justice.

Story Snapshot

Federal grand jury declined to indict six Democratic lawmakers on February 10, 2026, despite Justice Department efforts led by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro
The lawmakers created a video urging military members to resist unlawful orders, which President Trump characterized as “seditious behavior”
All six lawmakers are military or intelligence veterans protected by constitutional speech or debate clause immunity
The grand jury’s refusal represents the latest in a series of rebukes against prosecutors by citizens in the nation’s capital

Grand Jury Rejects Federal Prosecution Attempt

Federal prosecutors presented charges to a Washington, D.C. grand jury on February 10, 2026, seeking indictments against six Democratic lawmakers who created a video addressing military personnel. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro led the Justice Department’s effort to secure criminal charges, but grand jurors refused to issue indictments. The specific charges prosecutors attempted to bring remain unclear, as does whether indictments were sought against all six lawmakers or a subset. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia did not respond to requests for comment following the grand jury’s decision.

Constitutional Protections Shield Lawmakers

The six Democratic lawmakers—Senators Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, along with Representatives Jason Crow of Colorado, Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, and Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire—all possess prior military or intelligence service backgrounds. They produced a ninety-second video in 2025 that quoted existing law and urged service members to follow established military protocols and reject orders they believed to be unlawful. Congressional lawmakers possess general immunity from prosecution for acts taken in relation to their official roles under the speech or debate clause of the Constitution, a foundational protection designed to prevent executive branch interference with legislative functions.

Trump Administration Labels Video “Seditious”

President Trump characterized the lawmakers’ video as “seditious behavior” and publicly accused them of sedition. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth adopted the term “seditious six” to describe the lawmakers, a label that gained traction among Republican critics. The FBI began contacting the six lawmakers in November 2025 to schedule interviews regarding the video. This political framing preceded the Justice Department’s investigation and eventual grand jury presentation. The administration’s aggressive pursuit of criminal charges against sitting members of Congress for political speech raises significant constitutional concerns about the appropriate limits of prosecutorial discretion in politically sensitive cases.

Lawmakers Condemn Prosecution as Political Weaponization

Senator Mark Kelly called the attempted indictment “an outrageous abuse of power by Donald Trump and his lackies,” stating it wasn’t enough that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth censured him and threatened demotion. Kelly noted prosecutors tried to charge him with a crime “all because of something I said that they didn’t like.” Senator Elissa Slotkin asserted that President Trump continues to weaponize the justice system against perceived enemies, while praising the grand jury for upholding the rule of law and the Constitution. Slotkin noted Trump had “said repeatedly that I should be investigated, arrested, and hanged for sedition,” characterizing such rhetoric as belonging to a foreign country rather than the United States.

Pattern of Grand Jury Resistance Emerges

The grand jury’s refusal to indict represents the latest in a series of rebukes of prosecutors by citizens in the nation’s capital, according to sources familiar with the matter. The decision provides immediate legal protection for the six lawmakers and represents a significant setback for the administration’s prosecutorial strategy. The refusal signals that citizens serving on the grand jury found insufficient probable cause to proceed with charges despite the political pressure and public accusations from the highest levels of government. Senator Slotkin expressed hope that the decision “ends this politicized investigation for good,” though the investigation’s future trajectory remains uncertain with no official Justice Department response.