DOJ Officials Could Get Slapped on the Wrist for Violating Luigi Mangione’s Rights

If I were a federal prosecutor in Utah bringing murder charges against Tyler Robinson in the killing of Charlie Kirk, this would strike me as more than a little ominous. The future of their case would likely rely in large part on the president and the crew of his big ship of fools. They’ve already mucked around with the case of Luigi Mangione in New York, who is charged with the murder of health-care executive Brian Thompson. A New York State court already has thrown out the bogus terrorism charge the Manhattan district attorney tried to bring against Mangione. Now U.S. District Court judge Margaret Garnett has dropped the hammer on all the yapping MAGA hounds in Washington.

Local Criminal Rule 23.1 in the Southern District of New York forbids interested parties from making unsolicited public remarks about a pending trial, particularly concerning the innocence or guilt of a defendant. Garnett says in her filing on Wednesday that she ordered compliance with this rule six months ago:

It appears from this letter that multiple employees of the Department of Justice may have violated Local Criminal 23.1 and this court’s order of April 25, 2025, specifically identifying the strictures of this rule for counsel and directing the prosecution team to ensure that the highest levels of the Department of Justice, up to and including Attorney General Bondi, were aware of and understood they were bound by this Rule.

On Wednesday, acting on a complaint from Mangione’s lawyers, Garnett expressed her displeasure.

It is the duty of the lawyer or law firm, and of non-lawyer personnel employed by a lawyer’s office or subject to a lawyer’s supervision ... not to release or authorize the release of ... opinion that reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communications in connection with pending ... criminal litigation with which they are associated, if there is a substantial likelihood that the dissemination will interfere with a fair trial or otherwise prejudice the due administration of justice.

Specifically, Garnett cited statements by “two high-ranking staff members of the Department of Justice, including within the office of the Attorney General” as being in violation not only of the rule but also of her April order. Legal analyst Adam Klasfeld points out that an associate deputy attorney general named Brian Nieves reposted on Xwitter a post from a DOJ staffer named Chad Kilmartin that congratulated Attorney General Pam Bondi for seeking the death penalty for Mangione. In addition, the original letter from Mangione’s attorneys cited a television interview with the president—and approving social-media reaction from administration officials—as another violation of 23.1.

The big ship of fools sails on.