WASHINGTON, D.C. – A federal judge has urged legal representatives of Ashli Babbitt and the U.S. government to expedite their preparations to bring a wrongful death lawsuit to trial, ideally by December next year. Babbitt, an unarmed woman, died from a gunshot by a Capitol police officer during the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
The lawsuit, initially filed in the Southern District of California by Babbitt’s husband, seeks $30 million in damages. This case was moved to the D.C. District and involves complex legal and factual disputes, as highlighted in a recent joint statement by both parties involved.
The parties outlined their current inability to narrow legal and factual issues in their statement, leading to a request for a magistrate judge’s involvement to settle discovery disagreements. They anticipate the discovery period could take 16 months, given the large number of witnesses and the difficulty in scheduling depositions, with some individuals potentially incarcerated.
D.C. District Judge Ana C. Reyes criticized the suggested timeline as overly lengthy, labeling it “rather leisurely” and “unacceptable.” Reyes has mandated that both sides meet again to devise a more expedited schedule. The court has set stringent requirements moving forward, rejecting frivolous disputes and excessive demands in discovery processes, such as interrogatories and document requests.
Tensions escalated inside the Capitol on January 6 as protestors stormed the building while Congress was validating the 2020 Presidential election results. During the chaos, video footage captured the critical moment when Babbitt, trying to climb through a window of a barricaded door, was shot by a Capitol police officer, later identified as Lt. Michael Byrd.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the U.S. Capitol Police later concluded that Byrd’s actions were justifiable, as Babbitt was part of a group breaching a critical barrier to lawmakers actively being evacuated. The decision addressed the intense scenes where furniture and officers barricaded doors against the advancing mob. Moments before the shooting, attempts to repel the rioters with physical barriers had failed, prompting the officers’ withdrawal and Byrd’s subsequent use of lethal force.
This lawsuit places the January 6 Capitol breach back into the spotlight, not only as a day of significant national unrest but also as a complex legal case involving interpretations of lethal force, protest, and the security of national institutions. The case’s progress and potential trial will likely further contribute to ongoing national discussions on these pivotal issues.