A federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., has declined to indict former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, rejecting a Justice Department effort to bring criminal charges over her statements to Congress. The Washington Post reported that a Justice Department lawyer informed a magistrate judge on Tuesday that the grand jury could not agree on an indictment.
The prosecutor, identified by The Washington Post as Neville S. Hedley, acting senior litigation counsel for the division, did not specify on the record who the proposed indictment referenced. However, multiple outlets, including The New York Times, The Guardian, AP News, and Axios, confirmed through sources that the proceeding related directly to Hutchinson.
Fear is contagious, but so is courage.Cassidy Hutchinson bravely testified under oath about the January 6th insurrection.And today’s grand jury showed true courage in rejecting Trump’s abuses of power.Everyday citizens are standing up and holding this reckless President… https://t.co/ek7WxOxzYF pic.twitter.com/IWoJhD8Yl5
Prosecutors had sought to charge Hutchinson with making false statements to the House select committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. NBC News confirmed that the grand jury returned a “no bill,” formally halting the department’s attempt to secure an indictment.
Origins of the Congressional Testimony
Hutchinson served as a senior aide to then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. In June 2022, she delivered high-profile testimony during a televised hearing before the House January 6 committee, detailing conversations and events from the final days of the Trump administration.
As I said in a speech recently, the DOJ lawyers involved in these abusive prosecutions "have betrayed their oaths of office and violated their professional obligations… Perhaps they tell themselves that guilt or innocence is a question for the jury. Maybe they felt relief when… https://t.co/O31PhjNSP4″
Her testimony included accounts that Donald Trump attempted to direct his motorcade toward the Capitol after his speech on January 6, and that he reacted angrily when told he could not go. She also testified that Meadows had been warned about potential violence on Capitol Hill and that Trump was reluctant to call off supporters as the riot unfolded. Republicans and several Secret Service agents disputed specific details of her account regarding events inside the presidential vehicle.
Earlier this year, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) sent a criminal referral regarding Hutchinson to the Justice Department for investigation. Fox News noted that criminal referrals are recommendations and do not automatically result in charges or establish criminal wrongdoing.
A Shift in Justice Department Handling
The investigation into Hutchinson marked a departure from standard jurisdictional practice in Washington. According to The New York Times, the Civil Rights Division—led by Harmeet Dhillon—conducted the probe. Typically, allegations of lying to Congress are handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, currently led by Jeanine Pirro.
The grand jury’s refusal to indict Hutchinson follows similar outcomes in recent high-profile federal cases. NBC News reported that federal prosecutors had previously failed to secure indictments in multiple attempts related to New York Attorney General Letitia James, as well as an unsuccessful effort to charge six Democratic members of Congress over a social media video addressing military and intelligence personnel.
Attorney General Todd Blanche addressed previous grand jury rejections earlier in the year, telling NBC News that such outcomes indicate difficult cases rather than systemic errors, noting that grand jurors do not always reach the same conclusions as prosecutors.
Reactions and Legal Standing
The grand jury’s decision does not legally determine whether Hutchinson’s congressional testimony was truthful. Hutchinson has consistently maintained that she stands by her testimony.
Cassidy Hutchinson had her entire career ahead of her and she was willing to sacrifice it to do what so few in Washington are willing to do: tell the truth.She has shown more courage, patriotism, and integrity than the Republican politicians who had far more power, far less to… https://t.co/wzNE9rBxwt
Lawmakers and legal observers offered sharply differing reactions to the grand jury’s decision. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) posted on social media that the failure to secure an indictment points to a lack of evidence. Conversely, supporters of the investigation and administration allies have previously argued that Hutchinson’s accounts were false and warranted scrutiny.
It remains unclear whether federal prosecutors will present additional evidence to another grand jury or attempt to bring charges again, as a “no bill” does not bar the Justice Department from pursuing the case in the future.
As a former prosecutor, I agree with the saying that any prosecutor “can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.” So when the grand jury refused to indict Cassidy Hutchinson, that means there was no real evidence. Another huge embarrassment for the corrupt @AGToddBlanche. https://t.co/VER0VEIM7O
More on Cassidy Hutchinson
Keep reading
John Healey may use bank surcharge to fund budget pledges
When John Healey steps up to the dispatch box on Wednesday to deliver his very first Budget, he...
Sand and Lahn Clash Over Mental Health and Medicaid in Final Iowa Gubernatorial Debate
Voter choices in Iowa's gubernatorial race came into sharper focus on October 27, 2026, as Democratic State Auditor...
AdventHealth Performs First US Remote Robotic Prostate Surgery
“For generations, access to highly specialized care has often depended on where a patient lives,” Dr. Vipual Patel...
Video Shows Electrical Explosion During LAX People Mover Testing
Electrical Blast on LAX People Mover Track Sparks Scrutiny Amid Years of Delays Newly obtained video reveals an...