Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) is introducing a resolution to censure U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan and open an investigation into her “for showing open bias and partisanship in her official duties on the bench.”
He appeared to be referring to remarks the judge made in one Jan. 6-related sentencing.
“People gathered all over the country last year to protest the violent murder by the police of an unarmed man,” she said, referencing violent riots that erupted after the death of George Floyd. “To compare the actions of people protesting, mostly peacefully, for civil rights, to those of a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government is a false equivalency and ignores a very real danger that the January 6 riot posed to the foundation of our democracy.”
Mr. Gaetz’s resolution points to a few other cases of “open partisanship,” including the fact that the Obama-appointed district judge had donated thousands of dollars to his presidential campaign, and that during another Jan. 6-related sentencing she “lamented” that President Trump “remains free to this day.”
“It is deeply concerning that a United States District Court judge would exhibit such blatant political bias from the bench,” he said in a press release. “Justice may be blind, but the American people are not—we see Judge Chutkan for her actions, and we rebuke them in the greatest possible sense.”
Trump on Chutkan
President Trump has been critical of Judge Chutkan in multiple social media posts given her earlier remarks.A day after President Trump pleaded not guilty to the felony charges filed by Mr. Smith, he made a social media post: “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!” He later posted a campaign ad that claimed election interference on the part of the Biden administration.
In response, Mr. Smith’s office filed a motion pointing to the initial social media post as evidence a protective order was needed. He requested the judge issue an order barring President Trump from sharing information about the case.
Judge Chutkan ended up issuing a limited protective order, which bars President Trump from releasing information the prosecutors label sensitive, not all information.
The prosecution has also requested a Jan. 2, 2024, trial date, with jury selection to begin as early as Dec. 11.
“The government’s objective is clear: to deny President Trump and his counsel a fair ability to prepare for trial,“ the lawyers wrote. ”The Court should deny the government’s request.”
They cited a number of reasons an extension was required, including the 11.5 million pages of discovery Mr. Smith’s office has already provided.
“That is the entirety of Tolstoy’s War and Peace, cover to cover, 78 times a day, every day, from now until jury selection.”