President Donald Trump has issued additional pardons for two individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol riot, extending clemency to a militia member with firearms convictions and a woman sentenced for threatening FBI agents, actions that highlight ongoing legal and political debates over the 2021 insurrection. These pardons, announced on November 15, 2025, address charges separate from Trump’s initial broad clemency order in January, underscoring the administration’s continued focus on cases tied to the riot.
Dan Wilson, a self-identified member of the Oath Keepers and Gray Ghost Partisan Rangers militia, had been imprisoned on firearms offenses discovered during a search of his home related to the January 6 investigation. Despite being included in Trump’s sweeping January pardon for riot-related charges, Wilson remained incarcerated because the firearms convictions—possession of a firearm by a prohibited person and possession of an unregistered firearm—were not covered under the original order. An appeals court had earlier rejected his attempt to vacate these sentences, citing that the pardon’s language did not apply, leaving him set for release in 2028 until the new pardon freed him.
Suzanne Kaye, the other recipient, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for threatening to shoot FBI agents in social media videos posted in January 2021, shortly before she was scheduled to meet with agents about her presence at the Capitol on January 6. In the videos, she explicitly stated she would “shoot their a–” if agents came to her house, leading to her arrest in February 2021. The White House noted that Kaye suffers from stress-induced seizures, including one during her trial, and framed the case as an issue of political speech protected by the First Amendment.
The legal backdrop for these pardons involved contentious court rulings, with U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, previously criticizing the expansion of the original pardon’s scope. She emphasized that the phrase “related to” in the clemency order did not encompass unrelated offenses like Wilson’s firearms charges, a position upheld by an appeals court. This prompted the need for separate pardons to address what the administration deemed overreach in the justice system.
U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin, who advocated for both individuals, publicly thanked Trump for the actions, stating on social media that the pardons were necessary to “unwind the damage done by Biden’s DOJ weaponization” and allow healing to begin. Martin highlighted that Wilson’s firearms were found during a Jan. 6-related search, justifying the clemency as interconnected with the riot events, while portraying Kaye’s case as targeting disfavored speech.
White House officials defended the pardons, asserting that the firearms charges against Wilson were ultimately tied to the January 6 probe, as the search warrant stemmed from that investigation. They argued that Trump’s actions correct injustices and uphold constitutional rights, reflecting his broader stance on clemency for those involved in the Capitol attack. The administration’s move has drawn support from allies who see it as rectifying political bias, but it continues to fuel criticism from opponents who view it as undermining accountability for the violence.
These pardons come amid ongoing political divisions over the January 6 riot, with Trump having previously expressed pride in his initial clemency for over a thousand defendants. The latest actions signal a persistent effort to address cases where legal technicalities or separate charges kept individuals imprisoned, potentially setting a precedent for future pardons. As the debate over justice and executive power intensifies, these developments may influence public perception and legal strategies in similar cases moving forward.
