Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, has announced he will step down on January 16, just days before President-elect Donald Trump’s second inauguration. Graves, who has served in this role for over three years, will be succeeded by his principal assistant, Bridget Fitzpatrick, who will take over as acting U.S. attorney.
Graves characterized his time in the role as “the honor of a lifetime” and expressed gratitude to President Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton for their support.
Graves’ tenure as U.S. attorney spanned a broad array of issues, from national security to cryptocurrency-related cases. However, his work on January 6 prosecutions has drawn the most attention, with nearly 1,600 individuals charged in connection with the Capitol riot. Many defendants have been convicted or pleaded guilty, with several receiving prison sentences. The Department of Justice’s handling of these cases has been both lauded and criticized, highlighting the highly charged political landscape surrounding the prosecutions.
Critics of Graves have been vocal, including Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), who called Graves a “pawn” in what he alleged to be the DOJ’s politically motivated targeting of President Biden’s opponents. Biggs’ statement reflects a broader skepticism among some about the impartiality of these prosecutions. “The Swamp knows that justice is coming,” Biggs asserted, referring to the upcoming shift in federal leadership with Trump’s return.
U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves—the pawn at the helm of DOJ’s targeting of Joe Biden’s political opponents—just resigned ahead of President Trump’s inauguration.
The Swamp knows that justice is coming.
— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) December 30, 2024
Adding complexity to the narrative, the DOJ’s inspector general recently revealed that at least 26 confidential human sources (CHSs) were present in Washington, D.C., during the Capitol riot. The report indicated that some of these sources participated in illegal activities but were not among those charged. Graves’ office defended its approach, stating it generally refrains from prosecuting individuals whose sole crime was entering restricted grounds on January 6 and asserting it has applied this policy consistently, including with CHSs.
The January 6 prosecutions have become a focal point of debate in the national discourse, particularly as Trump has hinted at potential pardons for those convicted. During a recent interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Trump acknowledged the suffering of January 6 defendants and expressed openness to granting pardons, albeit with “some exceptions.” This statement underscores the lingering divide over the events of January 6 and their aftermath.
As Graves prepares to leave his post, the transition raises questions about the future direction of the DOJ’s approach to politically sensitive cases. The incoming administration’s stance on justice and accountability will undoubtedly shape the nation’s trajectory on these contentious issues.
The decision to prosecute nearly 1,600 individuals, coupled with the revelations about confidential informants, has left many questioning the balance between justice and politics. For some, Graves’ departure represents an opportunity for recalibration. For others, it signals a deepening divide in how the events of January 6 are perceived and addressed.
