Ashli Babbitt’s family and the United States agreed to a civil settlement of $4,975,000—about $5 million—to resolve claims arising from her 2021 death inside the U.S. Capitol. The signed agreement expressly says the United States does not admit liability or fault. It is a compromise of disputed claims, not a court finding that the government or an officer was legally responsible.
What the settlement says
The June 2025 stipulation sets the settlement at $4,975,000. The $5 million figure used in headlines is a rounded amount. The agreement resolves claims against the United States arising from the events at issue, including wrongful-death and survival claims, and releases the United States and specified related officials, agencies, employees, and entities, including the U.S. Capitol Police and other legislative-branch entities. Read the settlement stipulation.
![Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/416BB956AZL._SL160_.jpg)
![Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/31LOLL7Zn6L._SL160_.jpg)
The agreement describes the payment as a compromise of disputed claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, intended to avoid further litigation expense and risk. It states that liability is denied and that the settlement is “not and should not be construed as, an admission of liability or fault.”
What is known about fees and family proceeds
The stipulation says legal fees and case expenses are paid from the settlement amount, not on top of it. It caps attorney fees for the Federal Tort Claims Act matter at 25 percent of the settlement amount. The agreement and reviewed announcements do not establish how much any individual family member ultimately received, the net proceeds after all applicable costs, or when funds cleared and were distributed.
#1 Best Overall
How the settlement differs from DOJ’s 2021 decision
The settlement does not overturn or replace the Justice Department’s April 2021 decision not to pursue federal criminal charges. DOJ said its investigation did not find evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully violated 18 U.S.C. § 242. DOJ described that criminal standard as requiring proof of constitutionally unreasonable force and a willful, bad-purpose disregard of the law. It said fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or poor judgment alone would not satisfy the intent requirement. DOJ’s announcement.
| Proceeding | Question and standard | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| DOJ criminal investigation, 2021 | Whether evidence could establish a willful federal civil-rights violation beyond a reasonable doubt. | DOJ declined to bring charges; this was not a civil damages ruling. |
| Civil lawsuit and 2025 settlement | Whether disputed civil claims would be litigated or compromised. | The parties agreed to a $4,975,000 settlement without an admission of liability or fault. |
A decision not to prosecute is not a finding that no civil claim can be brought, just as a civil settlement without an admission is not a finding that the claims were proven. The two outcomes address different proceedings and standards.
Key dates in the case
- January 6, 2021: Babbitt was shot inside the Capitol while attempting to climb through a broken panel in a barricaded door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby. DOJ later said she was struck in the shoulder and died after being transported to a hospital.
- April 14, 2021: DOJ announced it would not pursue criminal charges and closed its investigation.
- January 5, 2024: The wrongful-death lawsuit was filed. Judicial Watch later said the complaint sought $30 million and alleged wrongful death, assault and battery, and negligence. Those were plaintiffs’ allegations, not findings by a court. Judicial Watch’s announcement.
- May 2, 2025: The parties told a federal judge they had reached a settlement in principle. At that point, AP reported that the terms had not been disclosed and the final agreement was not signed. AP report on the settlement in principle.
- June 2025: The parties signed the stipulation for $4,975,000. Judicial Watch announced the settlement on June 6.
What the agreement does—and does not—establish
The agreement establishes the total settlement amount, the release of covered claims, and the stated fee cap. It does not establish a judicial finding that the shooting was unlawful, an admission of wrongdoing by the United States, or the final amount distributed to each claimant. Judicial Watch’s characterization of the settlement and the complaint’s account of events should be understood as advocacy and allegations, respectively, rather than adjudicated conclusions.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
