Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Why were no January 6 defendants charged with insurrection?
Executive summary
Federal prosecutors did pursue the most serious charges available: dozens of defendants tied to organized groups were charged with seditious or seditious‑conspiracy counts (e.g., Oath Keepers and Proud Boys leaders), while the vast majority of the roughly 1,500–1,600 people charged faced obstruction, assault, property‑damage or misdemeanor counts [1] [2] [3]. Available sources show some members were convicted of seditious conspiracy, but reporting also emphasizes large numbers of plea deals to lesser counts and continuation of many prosecutions — which helps explain why relatively few individual rioters were charged with the statutory crime commonly labeled “insurrection” [1] [3] [4].
1. Why “insurrection” isn’t the label prosecutors usually used
The Justice Department largely charged people under statutes that match the conduct prosecutors could prove in individual cases — obstruction of an official proceeding, assaulting officers, civil disorder, destruction of property and trespass — rather than a broad “insurrection” label. Reporting and case compilations show hundreds of defendants pleaded to obstruction or misdemeanors and many trials ended in convictions on those specific offenses [3] [4] [1]. That pattern reflects a prosecutorial strategy of securing charges and convictions that fit the evidence and are more likely to succeed at trial [3].
2. Seditious conspiracy and related “insurrection”‑level prosecutions did occur
The record shows high‑profile prosecutions charging seditious conspiracy for organized groups: Stewart Rhodes and some Oath Keepers were charged and convicted of seditious conspiracy, and Proud Boys leadership received lengthy sentences — demonstrating that the Justice Department did use the most serious statutes where it believed the elements could be proven [1]. Lawfare’s overview also highlights that some defendants faced felonies beyond misdemeanors, and that prominent group leaders were pursued for coordinated plots [3] [1].
3. Volume and plea bargains changed the mix of charges
By the fourth anniversary, reporting tallied more than 1,500 people charged and roughly 1,200–1,270 convictions, with many guilty pleas skewing toward misdemeanors [2] [3]. Lawfare notes that among those who pleaded guilty, about 32% pleaded to felony charges and 68% to misdemeanors — a mix shaped by plea incentives and the difficulties of proving complex conspiratorial crimes at trial [3]. PBS and other trackers confirm hundreds of misdemeanor‑only cases, which helps explain why “insurrection”‑level counts were comparatively rare in the overall docket [4].
4. Legal and evidentiary barriers to charging everyone with insurrection‑level crimes
Charging seditious conspiracy or similar statutes requires proof of specific intent and coordinated plans to use force to obstruct the lawful transfer of power — evidentiary thresholds prosecutors could meet in a subset of organized, pre‑planned plots but not in many individual breach cases [1]. Available sources emphasize that prosecutors differentiated between organized conspiracies (where coordination and planning evidence existed) and many participants who entered the Capitol without proof of conspiratorial intent [3] [1].
5. Political and post‑case developments that affect public perception
Reporting also documents political developments that changed the post‑conviction landscape: a mass pardon issued on January 20, 2025, erased many convictions and complicated public reckoning with which charges were brought and why [5] [2] [1]. Coverage notes that this pardon removed penalties for most defendants and that a small number of convictions (e.g., certain high‑profile conspiracy convictions) drew particular attention before and after clemency [5] [6].
6. Competing narratives and remaining gaps in reporting
Some outlets and commentators assert alternative accounts — alleging broader misconduct, “Fedsurrection” theories, or media mischaracterization of events — but these claims are presented in partisan commentary and are not corroborated by the mainstream case records summarized in DOJ case lists and major press trackers [7] [8]. Available official lists and news summaries document the actual charges and convictions [9] [4], but do not address every contested narrative; therefore, claims not covered in the provided sources are “not found in current reporting” [9] [4].
7. Bottom line for readers
Prosecutors did pursue the most serious statutes where they could demonstrate coordinated, criminal plans to use force (leading to seditious‑conspiracy convictions for some leaders), but the majority of defendants were charged with and pleaded to obstruction, assault, trespass or misdemeanors — a result shaped by evidence, plea dynamics, and the practical limits of proving “insurrection”‑level intent in every individual case [1] [3] [4].