⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The D.C. Circuit hears five consolidated appeals seeking refunds of criminal financial penalties after presidential pardons. John Sullivan's sentence for his role in the January sixth Capitol riot included forfeiture of money he had earned by selling video he recorded there. After President Trump's January 2025 pardon, the court vacated his convictions, and Sullivan sought his money back. To vacate a judgment means to set it aside; the dispute is what that requires the government to do with money it already collected. The district judge refused the refund, holding that money in the Treasury could not be returned without a congressional appropriation: legal authorization to draw on those funds. Sullivan and the government will argue that the vacated convictions require a refund and that existing law permits repayment. The court has appointed an amicus, or friend of the court, to defend the district court orders refusing refunds. You will hear separate lawyers for the defendants, the government, and that court-appointed amicus.

United States v. Sullivan, et al. (No. 25-3059) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, argued October 19, 2026.