A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dismissed a lawsuit filed by two groups of FBI agents who sought to block the Trump administration from potentially revealing the identities of those involved in the investigations into the January 6 Capitol riot.
U.S. District Judge Jia M. Cobb ruled on Thursday that the agents lacked standing to bring the case, writing that their claims were speculative and unsupported by evidence.
“Plaintiffs’ claims are too speculative,” Cobb wrote in her 32-page ruling. “They do not plausibly allege that Defendants are about to engage in any of the conduct agents are worried about.”
The lawsuit emerged earlier this year during what Cobb described as a “whirlwind of chaos and fear” following President Donald Trump’s second inauguration. At the time, agents said they feared retaliation after senior Department of Justice officials allegedly demanded a list of those involved in January 6-related investigations. When the FBI declined to comply, eight officials were reportedly fired over what the administration called “weaponization.”
Agents were reportedly required to fill out surveys indicating whether they worked on any January 6 cases. Meanwhile, some previously convicted Capitol riot defendants—now pardoned—began publicly calling for the exposure of FBI personnel.
“Agents raced to court, terrified that they would be at real risk of physical harm if their identities were somehow made public,” Cobb wrote.
The court granted expedited discovery to determine if the Trump administration was planning to reveal the names. But according to the judge, no such evidence materialized.
“Discovery revealed no evidence that Defendants are on the verge of disclosing Plaintiffs’ identities,” Cobb wrote. “The Court must therefore dismiss Plaintiffs’ disclosure-related claims.”
Though President Trump has repeatedly criticized FBI agents—accusing them of engaging in politically motivated investigations and referring to them on social media as “thugs,” “tyrants,” and even “Gestapo”—Cobb said such rhetoric does not legally establish any intent to release their names.
“Those statements certainly suggest animus toward some Plaintiffs,” she noted, “but they do not remotely indicate that Defendants intend to take the particular action at issue here.”
The agents also alleged First Amendment retaliation, claiming internal DOJ probes were launched purely because leadership believed they lacked loyalty to President Trump. They argued these investigations harmed their careers. However, Cobb declined to consider those claims, saying they were not part of the amended complaint.
“The amended complaint alleges only that ‘anticipated’ employment actions, like terminations or other unspecified future ‘adverse actions,’ would violate the First Amendment,” Cobb wrote. “Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge such hypothetical, contingent actions. And Plaintiffs cannot amend their complaint via their briefs.”
As a result, the judge dismissed all of the agents’ claims.
In a statement to Reuters, the FBI Agents Association—a plaintiff in the case—called the ruling “disappointing” and said it was reviewing its legal options.
“Agent safety has and will always be our paramount concern,” the group said. “We filed this case to support and protect the dedicated FBI agents and employees who were assigned to investigations related to activities on January 6, 2021.”
