New Bill Bans Federal Settlements for January 6 Assaulters, Even for Claims Against the Government

The “No Settlements for January 6 Law Enforcement Assaulters Act” is short and to the point: it stops the federal government from using any federal money—including the Judgment Fund—to pay legal settlements to a specific group of people. Specifically, it targets anyone convicted of assaulting a law enforcement officer during the January 6, 2021, events at the Capitol. This ban applies to settlements related to harm they allegedly suffered during the events themselves or harm related to their subsequent prosecution.

The Fine Print: Who is Actually Covered?

This bill doesn't just apply to everyone charged in connection with January 6. It narrowly defines a “covered individual” as someone convicted of assaulting an officer (under 18 U.S.C. 111 or D.C. Code section 432) during the Capitol breach. If you were convicted of simple trespassing or disorderly conduct, this bill doesn't affect your ability to settle a civil case against the government. If you were convicted of assaulting an officer, however, the door to a federal settlement is slammed shut. The key takeaway here is that the bill is highly specific, targeting those with a specific violent criminal conviction.

The Real-World Impact on Legal Recourse

Here’s where this gets complicated for people who care about due process. When someone sues the federal government—say, claiming excessive force during arrest or misconduct during a detention—the government often settles the case to save time and taxpayer money. This bill removes that option entirely for the defined group. This means that if a person who meets the “covered individual” definition has a legitimate civil claim against the government—for example, claiming they were severely injured by an officer after they were detained and posed no threat—the government cannot settle that case. This prohibition stands regardless of the claim’s merit.

Why does this matter to the average person? When the government can’t settle a case, the claim must go to trial. This is expensive for both the government and the courts, slowing down the justice system for everyone else. More importantly, it raises questions about fairness. While the bill’s intent is clearly punitive toward those who assaulted officers, it also restricts the government's ability to admit fault and compensate for legitimate civil rights violations that might have occurred during the arrest or prosecution process. Essentially, it legislatively dictates that a specific group of convicted people cannot receive financial redress via settlement for any civil claim stemming from that time period, even if the government was demonstrably in the wrong on a separate matter. This creates a unique legal barrier for this group that doesn't exist for other convicted criminals, potentially forcing them into lengthy, costly trials to prove their case.