How can it be that the most devastating legal opinion ever written about an American president may not trigger a criminal investigation?

A U.S. District judge dismissed the felony charge that has become the single most important weapon in the government’s arsenal in Capitol insurrection cases.

Going forward, evidentiary rules and procedures must be adapted to ensure they are prepared for this influx.

The Jan. 6 Committee filed a brief in federal court asserting that evidence "establishes a good-faith belief that [former President] Trump and others may have engaged in criminal and/or fraudulent acts.”  

In both the attack on the Capitol and the standoff at the Tennessee courthouse, members of the Oath Keepers promoted self-serving, distorted “patriotic” rhetoric to justify criminal acts against governme...

When Capitol riot defendant Guy Reffitt goes to trial before a federal jury in Washington, D.C., prosecutors plan to present a shock-and-awe campaign of video, audio and other digital evidence.

Tracing the influence of the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Mazars on the House investigation into the Capitol riot.

In January, a group of North Carolina voters filed a 34-page petition to block Rep. Madison Cawthorn’s name from appearing on the 2022 primary ballot. What’s behind the petition?

In this post, we offer a guide on the authority of a congressional committee to issue a subpoena to a sitting member of Congress—and the potential to have that subpoena enforced if the recipient defies it.