The family of Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot during the January 6 Capitol breach, has encountered a significant development in their legal battle. Their $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against the U.S. government has been moved from the conservative-leaning courts of San Diego to the liberal stronghold of San Francisco, causing widespread outrage among conservative circles.
Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran from San Diego, was shot by Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd as she attempted to climb through a broken window in the Speaker’s Lobby during the chaos of January 6, 2021. The lawsuit, filed by Judicial Watch on behalf of Babbitt's husband and her estate, accuses Lt. Byrd and the U.S. government of wrongful death, assault and battery, and negligence.
Daily Reminder
It's been 1258 days since the murder of Ashli Babbitt and Michael Byrd is still walking around free.#JusticeForAshliBabbit pic.twitter.com/TORYUu4GDB
— Kat™ The Hammer ⚒️ (@KatTheHammer1) June 17, 2024
The relocation of the case has sparked accusations of judicial bias and manipulation. Critics argue that the transfer to San Francisco, known for its progressive judiciary, undermines the family's pursuit of justice. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton expressed deep concerns, stating that the move "raises serious questions about the fairness and impartiality of the judicial process".
Babbitt's family and supporters have been vocal about what they perceive as a cover-up and a miscarriage of justice. They argue that Ashli was unjustly killed and that Lt. Byrd acted recklessly. The lawsuit claims that Babbitt was unarmed and posed no immediate threat when she was shot. Witnesses at the scene allegedly shouted, "You just murdered her," underscoring the belief that her death was unnecessary and avoidable.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt! pic.twitter.com/XypW67ovBn
— Ray Pritchett (@Ray_P45) June 14, 2024
Lt. Byrd, who was not charged or disciplined following the incident, has been a focal point of controversy. His previous conduct, including leaving a loaded firearm in a Capitol restroom, has been cited by Babbitt’s legal team to highlight a pattern of negligence and incompetence. The lawsuit contends that Congress and the Capitol Police should have been aware of Byrd’s propensity for dangerous behavior.
The emotional and political dimensions of this case are profound. For many conservatives, Ashli Babbitt is seen as a martyr who was exercising her constitutional rights. The move to San Francisco courts is viewed as an attempt to stifle a fair trial and to shield federal authorities from accountability. This sentiment is echoed by conservative pundits and media outlets, who argue that the judicial system is being weaponized against dissenters.
The broader implications of this case extend beyond the courtroom. It underscores the deep divisions in American society and the contrasting perspectives on the events of January 6. While some view Babbitt and others involved in the Capitol breach as insurrectionists, her supporters see her as a patriot standing up for electoral integrity.
As the lawsuit progresses, it is likely to remain a flashpoint in the ongoing debate about justice, accountability, and the political dynamics surrounding January 6. The outcome will not only impact the Babbitt family but could also set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future.
