img
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Luigi Mangione will not face death penalty after DOJ declines to appeal ruling

If jurors find him guilty of fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, he could spend the rest of his life behind bars.

ADVERTISEMENT

If jurors find him guilty of fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, he could spend the rest of his life behind bars.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have chosen not to appeal a prior ruling to pursue capital punishment against Luigi Mangione, the 27-year-old charged in the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thomspon.

On Friday, prosecutors disclosed they will not challenge a prior ruling that eliminated the possibility of the death penalty. The decision means Mangione, an Ivy League-educated defendant, will not face execution even if convicted, per the New York Post.

In correspondence to the court, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said it would not contest Judge Margarett Garnett’s Jan. 30 order dismissing the death penalty-eligible murder charge, pointing to legal deficiencies identified in the case.

Mangione is slated to stand trial in federal court in September. If jurors find him guilty of fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson during a targeted attack on a Midtown sidewalk on Dec. 4, 2024, he could spend the rest of his life behind bars.

However, the federal indictment will not technically include a murder count. Instead, prosecutors are proceeding with a charge of “stalking” Thompson, which they allege ultimately led to the executive’s death.

Separately, Mangione faces a state murder trial set for June, where he could likewise receive a life sentence if convicted. The Maryland-born defendant has entered a plea of not guilty in connection with Thompson’s death.

In her ruling, Garnett explained that to justify seeking capital punishment, prosecutors were required to demonstrate that Mangione killed Thompson while committing another qualifying “crime of violence.” Although the government charged him with “stalking,” the court determined that stalking does not satisfy the statutory definition of a violent crime.

Garnett conceded that her interpretation might appear “tortured and strange” to others. She wrote that “the law must be the court’s only concern.”
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign in to comment

Comments

Powered by The Post Millennial CMS™ Comments

Join and support independent free thinkers!

We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.

Support The Post Millennial

Remind me next month

To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2026 The Post Millennial, Privacy Policy