On Monday, the Justice Department took steps to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by individuals involved in the January 6 incident. The lawsuit, submitted under the Federal Tort Claims Act, claims to have been hampered due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, according to the department.
The Justice Department argued that the lawsuit couldn’t proceed because the defendants failed to submit the administrative claim within the legally required timeframe. “All the claims in the Complaint are ‘forever barred’ due to the failure to timely file the administrative claim with the agency,” the filing stated.
The plaintiffs, who referred to injuries sustained on January 6, 2021, attributed these injuries to “excessive police force.” However, the Justice Department highlighted deficiencies in the plaintiffs’ submissions, noting that they were “only partially completed” and missing signatures and necessary documentation.
Under the guidelines of the FTCA, claimants have a maximum of two years to initiate a lawsuit, alongside other specific deadlines necessary to bring a case against the federal government. The department underlined that the alleged incidents occurred on January 6, 2021, which entitled the plaintiffs to file a claim only by January 6, 2023.
Further complicating the plaintiffs’ case, the Justice Department noted that the “earliest claim of the Named Plaintiffs was dated July 29, 2025,” which exceeds the two-year limitation period established under the FTCA.
The department argued that the plaintiffs “knew that they were injured and knew who injured them, but they instead chose to wait until well past the deadline to file the claims.”
On Sunday evening, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued an order rescinding a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund that was meant to compensate allies of President Trump. The order, however, does not include language that would bar government restitution or payouts to convicted Jan. 6 rioters.
A former Justice Department lawyer said Blanche’s unilateral rescission of the “anti-weaponization” fund has no legal effect and doesn’t prevent the fund from being revived in the future.