Top DC Prosecutor Sparks Outrage with WWII Internment Comparison to Jan. 6 Cases

The top federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., has stirred a wave of criticism after comparing the criminal charges faced by January 6 Capitol rioters to one of the darkest chapters in American history — the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

Ed Martin, the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, made the remark in an internal email, raising concerns about how some rioters are being prosecuted. Specifically, he questioned the use of a felony obstruction charge, suggesting it could be seen as an overreach. But what set off alarms was his direct comparison of this legal strategy to the U.S. government’s mass incarceration of Japanese Americans in the 1940s — a move many historians and civil rights leaders see as not only inaccurate but deeply offensive.

What Exactly Did He Say?

Martin reportedly wrote that the use of the felony obstruction statute — initially crafted to go after corporate fraud — might echo past “legal failures,” naming the internment of Japanese Americans as an example. He argued that pushing forward with certain charges against Jan. 6 defendants could one day be looked back on with similar regret.

His comments came just after the Supreme Court ruled to narrow the scope of that specific statute, which had been used in hundreds of Capitol riot cases. That ruling raised questions about how prosecutors nationwide might now adjust their strategy. But Martin’s way of framing that concern went far beyond a legal debate — and many say it crossed a major ethical line.

Why the Internment Comparison Is So Controversial

Between 1942 and 1945, more than 120,000 Japanese Americans — most of them U.S. citizens — were forcibly removed from their homes and held in government-run internment camps. They were never charged with crimes, never given due process, and had no ties to espionage or sabotage. The internment is now widely seen as an act of racial injustice fueled by wartime hysteria and prejudice.

So, to compare those innocent families to rioters who stormed the Capitol to overturn an election is, to many, not just wrong — it’s offensive.

“This is a complete distortion of history,” said Ann Burroughs, President of the Japanese American National Museum. “Internment was a government-sanctioned injustice rooted in racism. The people being prosecuted for January 6 broke into a federal building and attacked democracy itself.”

Civil Rights Groups Fire Back

Martin’s comments have drawn swift pushback from civil rights organizations. OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates called his words “deeply hurtful and misleading,” accusing him of minimizing a tragedy that still resonates in Japanese American communities.

Others noted that the Capitol riot cases involve people who are getting legal representation, facing actual charges, and having their day in court — something interned Japanese Americans never received.

“This isn’t a debate over policy,” said Linda Ng, OCA’s national president. “It’s about accuracy and respect. Equating violent insurrectionists to innocent American citizens imprisoned without cause is not just wrong — it’s dangerous.”

Who Is Ed Martin — and Why This Matters Politically

Martin, a former defense attorney who has represented clients tied to January 6, was recently appointed interim U.S. Attorney by the Biden administration. But his close ties to former President Donald Trump and his outspoken defense of Capitol riot defendants have already made his position controversial.

Some federal prosecutors reportedly resigned after he dismissed several cases related to the riot. Others within the Department of Justice have privately voiced concerns about his approach and the message it sends.

Senator Adam Schiff has placed a formal hold on Martin’s permanent appointment, citing the need for further review of his decisions and public comments.

Where Things Go From Here

Martin has not publicly responded to the backlash. Whether his comparison was a careless analogy or a sign of deeper concerns about government overreach, the damage may already be done. Legal experts say it’s unlikely the DOJ will reverse course on the majority of Jan. 6 prosecutions — especially since most have already gone through the courts.

Still, the controversy underscores just how politically and emotionally charged these cases remain more than three years after the riot. And for many Japanese Americans, Martin’s remarks reopened old wounds in a way that felt both unnecessary and hurtful.