The judge's ruling that allowed Mike Pence to testify before the grand jury about the assault on the Capitol was released

The historic photo of Mike Pence presiding over the session of Congress to certify the results of the Electoral College, on January 6, 2021.

Photo: Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images

The figures who pressured Mike Pence to reject the certification of the electoral votes of Joe Biden on January 6, 2021, they asked him to act “illegally”, ruled the chief judge of the Washington DC federal district court in a secret decision in April, and that decision It's the key to understand how a judge made it easier for former Vice President Mike Pence to answer questions from the special prosecutor Jack Smith about the events that led to the attack on the United States Capitol.

The 19-page opinion of the District Court of Columbia judge. James E Boasberg, that the judge partially revealed Friday at the behest of the media, paved the way for investigators of the special prosecutor Jack Smith Former Vice President Pence will be questioned about his conversations with different people that focused on Pence rejecting Biden's supporters, possibly to nullify the 2020 presidential election and get Donald Trump elected instead, according to Politico.

Federal Judge Boasberg presides over the court where the trials of the assailants who broke into the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021 are held, as well as the grand jury that attends the investigations of Attorney General Jack Smith on the former president Donald Trump and the possible attempt to annul the result of the 2020 elections.

Pence had initially fought special counsel Jack Smith's subpoena, investigating attempts to overturn the 2020 election result that culminated in the January 6, 2021 assault on the United States Capitol.

In one of his first official acts, Chief Judge Boasberg issued what could become a landmark ruling when he ordered former Vice President Mike Pence to testify about his contacts with Trump in the days leading up to the insurrection.

Last March, Pence hailed what he called a landmark decision by US District Judge James E. Boasberg of Washington, DC, accepting that Pence could remain silent on issues specifically related to his role in Congress. on January 6, when he chaired a joint session of Congress to confirm the results of the presidential election, which was disrupted by a violent pro-Trump mob.

Pence called Boasberg's ruling the first to expose how a vice president also qualifies for the constitutional protection lawmakers enjoy of being forced to testify even in criminal investigations, according to The Washington Post, which also reported Friday on the partially disclosed Boasberg ruling.

Boasberg said in his ruling that the protection is limited to lawmakers' official duties or actions taken in preparation for them, and it does not extend to "communications urging a legislator to act illegally."

Boasberg's ruling and reasoning had been kept secret until now because grand jury rules generally prohibit anyone but witnesses from discussing them. News organizations asked the judge to disclose them and on Friday he granted their request, noting that disclosures made by Pence and his team removed the need for secrecy.

“The bottom line is that conversations calling for Pence to turn down voters on January 6 are not shielded” from the investigation, Boasberg said in his opinion.

Pence, who is running against Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, has positioned himself as a reluctant witness who has fought demands for his testimony. Still, he discussed the events that led to the attempt to overturn the 2020 election result in his book published late last year, "So help me God," and in promotional interviews.

Keep reading:

– Judge orders Pence to testify about conversations he had with Trump before January 6
– Mike Pence will not hit ruling that forces him to testify for the riots of January 6
– Trump loses appeal to block Pence from testifying before grand jury on January 6
– Pence unmasked Trump at CNN town hall: “He asked me to choose between him and the Constitution”

Author Profile

Nathan Rivera
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Nathan Rivera, a dedicated journalist who has had the privilege of writing for the online newspaper Today90. My journey in the world of journalism has been a testament to the power of dedication, integrity, and passion.

My story began with a relentless thirst for knowledge and an innate curiosity about the events shaping our world. I graduated with honors in Investigative Journalism from a renowned university, laying the foundation for what would become a fulfilling career in the field.

What sets me apart is my unwavering commitment to uncovering the truth. I refuse to settle for superficial answers or preconceived narratives. Instead, I constantly challenge the status quo, delving deep into complex issues to reveal the reality beneath the surface. My dedication to investigative journalism has uncovered numerous scandals and shed light on issues others might prefer to ignore.

I am also a staunch advocate for press freedom. I have tirelessly fought to protect the rights of journalists and have faced significant challenges in my quest to inform the public truthfully and without constraints. My courage in defending these principles serves as an example to all who believe in the power of journalism to change the world.

Throughout my career, I have been honored with numerous awards and recognitions for my outstanding work in journalism. My investigations have changed policies, exposed corruption, and given a voice to those who had none. My commitment to truth and justice makes me a beacon of hope in a world where misinformation often prevails.

At Today90, I continue to be a driving force behind journalistic excellence. My tireless dedication to fair and accurate reporting is an invaluable asset to the editorial team. My biography is a living testament to the importance of journalism in our society and a reminder that a dedicated journalist can make a difference in the world.