Jeanine Pirro tried to indict six members of Congress, and the grand jury’s response was so decisive it’s now embarrassing the White House

Jeanine Pirro’s office has officially dropped its pursuit of charges against six Democratic lawmakers after a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., unanimously rejected the attempt to indict them. The grand jury made this decision roughly two weeks ago, finding that the government had not even met the low legal bar of probable cause needed to bring an indictment.

According to NBC News, this means there was not enough evidence to suggest a crime had even occurred. While the case is now considered dead in Washington, it does not technically stop a federal prosecutor from trying to bring a case in another district, though there are no signs of that happening.

Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia appointed by President Trump, had been trying to charge six Democratic lawmakers, all of whom have backgrounds in the military or intelligence communities. They are Senators Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Mark Kelly of Arizona, and Representatives Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Jason Crow of Colorado, Chris Deluzio, and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania.

The grand jury’s unanimous rejection highlights how thin the case against these lawmakers really was

The alleged offense was a social media video in which the six lawmakers urged members of the military and intelligence communities not to comply with unlawful orders. This is an important detail, because under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, service members are required to follow only lawful orders and must refuse those that are clearly illegal. What the lawmakers said in the video is consistent with existing military law.

President Trump was not pleased. He took to social media to call the lawmakers “traitors” and accused them of “SEDITION AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” even suggesting their behavior was possibly punishable by death. Despite these strong words, the grand jury found no evidence of a crime. For a closer look at how the seditious six case collapsed, the details are striking.

Legal experts and Democrats have been vocal in their criticism of the attempt to prosecute the lawmakers. They described it as an unprecedented use of the Justice Department’s powers as a political attack on what they consider protected free speech.

Many also saw it as a sign that the guardrails that were in place during Trump’s first administration have been eroding. This is not the only instance where the White House has faced criticism over contradictions in how it handles politically sensitive matters. The grand jury’s unanimous rejection of the indictment now puts the White House in an awkward position, given how loudly the president had pushed for action against these lawmakers.

The case drew significant attention not just because of who was targeted, but because of what they were targeted for, which was speech that aligned with established military law. With the grand jury delivering such a decisive outcome, the episode stands as a notable setback for the administration’s efforts.