Washington grand jury declines to indict Cassidy Hutchinson over Jan. 6 testimony

The decision

On Tuesday, 27 October 2026, a federal grand jury in Washington rejected a Justice Department request to indict Cassidy Hutchinson, a former White House aide who testified about Donald Trump's conduct during the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. The refusal surfaced in a brief court appearance that afternoon, when Neville S. Hedley, acting senior litigation counsel in the department's civil rights division, told Magistrate Judge Zia M. Faruqui that the grand jury had not concurred on the proposed indictment. Hedley did not name the defendant, but people familiar with the matter said he was referring to Hutchinson. Hutchinson declined to comment through her lawyer, and the Justice Department did not immediately provide a comment. Legal circles call such a rejection a "no true bill", and it is rare because prosecutors need only convince a majority of jurors that probable cause exists.

Her 2022 testimony

Hutchinson, who had been a special assistant to Mark Meadows, Trump's chief of staff, gave her account to the House committee investigating the attack at a hearing announced only 24 hours in advance. She described an angry, defiant president who tried to have armed protesters skip security screenings at a rally that morning, and she said Trump grabbed the steering wheel of the presidential SUV after the Secret Service refused to take him to the Capitol. As the crowd chanted for Vice President Mike Pence to be hanged, she testified that Trump declined to intervene. Republicans accuse her of lying under oath, and Secret Service agents she named have said they do not recall some of the incidents she described. Trump denied much of her account on Truth Social, calling her a "total phony" and "bad news".

Referral and an unusual route to the grand jury

In 2026, Reps. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia and Jim Jordan of Ohio referred Hutchinson to the Justice Department over what they alleged was false testimony. Loudermilk sent the criminal referral, and Jordan co-signed it. Criminal referrals are recommendations and do not necessarily indicate wrongdoing or lead to charges. The case then went to the department's Civil Rights Division, led by Trump loyalist Harmeet Dhillon, a break from precedent, since the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, currently led by Jeanine Pirro, normally handles investigations into alleged lying to Congress. According to the New York Times, some prosecutors were deeply skeptical that a case could be made and concluded that a conviction would be difficult to win.

A pattern of setbacks

The decision is the latest in a series of failed efforts. In February, a Washington grand jury declined to indict six Democratic lawmakers over a video urging service members to reject orders they believe to be unlawful. Before this decision, the department had announced charges against two former FBI agents and former FBI Director James B. Comey, but none of them had been charged by a grand jury, a step prosecutors must clear before any prosecution can move forward. The Independent described the cases as a surge in politically sensitive actions ahead of the midterm elections, including a search by federal agents of the home of Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. The New York Times counted at least eight current U.S. attorneys who played prominent roles in pushing Trump's grievances, three of them without Senate confirmation.