Federal prosecutors have asked a judge to dismiss charges against Nathalie Rose Jones, who was accused of threatening to kill President Donald Trump, after a grand jury declined to return an indictment, her attorney and court filings show.
A one-page filing by the U.S. attorney’s office led by Jeanine Pirro said dismissal of the case "is in the interests of justice" but offered no additional explanation. Jones had been scheduled to appear Monday for a preliminary hearing in federal court.
Defense attorney Mary Petras filed a request asking the court to dismiss the case "with prejudice," which would bar prosecutors from later reviving the charge. Petras said a prosecutor notified her that no further presentations were made to the grand jury after its initial consideration.
"Given the grand jury's decision, Ms. Jones should not be forced to live under the threat of later charges and rearrest," Petras wrote in court papers. She also told the court that "the charges against Ms. Jones were based on interpretations of statements the government presented to the grand jury." The defense attorney did not elaborate on which statements were at issue.
The move to drop the case is the latest in a sequence of setbacks for prosecutors in Washington amid a heightened law-enforcement posture tied to the Trump administration. The U.S. attorney's filing did not specify the reasons for seeking dismissal beyond the general statement that it served the interests of justice.
Federal statutes make threats against the president a serious criminal offense, and cases of this nature typically prompt rapid investigation. In this matter, prosecutors presented evidence to a grand jury but did not secure an indictment, a key step that would have allowed the case to proceed to trial. The decision by prosecutors to seek dismissal comes after the grand jury's action, according to the defense.
Court records show the government asked a judge to dismiss the case on Friday; the one-page filing did not provide factual details or explain whether the decision followed a legal assessment, evidentiary concerns or prosecutorial discretion. Jones's attorney argued that the grand jury's refusal to indict and the absence of additional grand jury presentations supported a dismissal with prejudice.
The case's closing will end the immediate federal prosecution, but the extent to which state or other federal authorities might pursue related matters was not indicated in filings. Officials in the U.S. attorney's office did not provide further comment in the filing.
The dismissal notification arrives amid heightened scrutiny of prosecutorial decisions in politically sensitive matters in Washington. The U.S. attorney's office provided no public statement elaborating on the case or its review process, and court documents filed by the defense were the primary source of details provided to the public.
A judge will now consider the government's motion to dismiss and the defense's request that it be with prejudice. If the judge grants dismissal with prejudice, prosecutors would generally be barred from bringing the same charge against Jones again in federal court.