A left-wing activist network is running organized trainings that coach attendees on how to survive jury selection in federal cases and then vote "not guilty" regardless of the evidence, training materials and webinar recordings reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon reveal. The group, called Freedom Trainers, describes itself as a "loose network of trainers teaching collective noncooperation." Its fiscal sponsor is Community Change, which the Free Beacon identifies as a George Soros-funded organization.
The operation is not subtle. Freedom Trainers' own pamphlet tells trainees they can vote not guilty for "any reason you believe is just." A training slide deck reviewed by the Free Beacon goes further, telling prospective jurors: "You always have the option of finding the defendant 'Not Guilty.' Even if you believe the law was broken. Even if the judge says you must convict."
Neither Freedom Trainers nor Community Change responded to the Free Beacon's requests for comment.
The group's strategy, as laid out in its training materials, amounts to a step-by-step guide for getting seated on a jury under false pretenses. Freedom Trainers advises attendees to keep their addresses current so they receive jury summonses. During voir dire, the formal jury selection process in which attorneys question prospective jurors for bias, the group tells trainees to dress neutrally, give brief answers, and say they will listen to the evidence before forming conclusions. The cardinal instruction: "Never mention jury nullification."
Jury nullification, meaning a juror's decision to vote against conviction even when the evidence proves the defendant broke the law, is not itself a crime. But deliberately concealing the intent to nullify during jury selection raises serious questions about whether a prospective juror is lying to the court, which can constitute contempt or obstruction.
Freedom Trainers appears aware of this tension. Its trainings begin with a disclaimer stating that no legal advice will be given and that anyone actively serving on a jury should log off. One Freedom Trainers official identified only as "Marla" told webinar participants plainly.
We don't want to mess with any ongoing trials.
The group also instructs activists not to target other jurors, not to lie, not to disclose jury deliberations, not to claim publicly that they nullified after a trial, and not to coordinate with a defendant. Freedom Trainers classifies educating others on jury nullification, handing out flyers near courthouses, and voting "not guilty" for any reason as legal actions. It classifies stating an intent to nullify before trial and discussing nullification with fellow jurors as legal but "risky."
Freedom Trainers was established in late 2024, according to the Free Beacon. Its website states that "Before Donald Trump's election, an informal group of trainers" with experience working under what the group calls "authoritarian regimes" began planning for a second Trump administration.
The group was co-founded by Daniel Hunter, the founder of D.C.-based activist group Choose Democracy, and Keya Chatterjee, the executive director of Free DC and former executive director of the US Climate Action Network. Among the group's listed trainers is Maria J. Stephan, an author and Council on Foreign Relations member who recently appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.
Freedom Trainers claims it "has trained hundreds of thousands of committed people across the United States." The group encourages its trainees to distribute copies of its pamphlet at courthouses on Monday mornings "before people are placed on juries."
During a recent webinar, Hunter framed nullification as civic duty.
We have a legal remedy to correct when the court system, when the Department of Justice, has gone astray and awry.
He told attendees that nullification is "your right as a juror to stand up for what you believe to be right, to use your analysis, your conscience, your morals." In the same webinar, Hunter raised the example of a man shown on video assaulting a federal agent with a sandwich and argued there are "a lot of possible reasons" a grand jury could vote against an indictment in that case. A grand jury did in fact reject felony charges for the man, the Free Beacon reported.
In a separate webinar, the official identified as Marla described jury nullification as a form of political action.
That is one way that we, as regular folks, can insert ourselves into the criminal legal system and create some justice through some noncooperation.
Marla also acknowledged during the webinar that she was once removed from a jury after a prosecutor "had figured out I was an activist."
The Department of Justice did not stay silent. A DOJ spokeswoman issued a statement directly to the Free Beacon.
While we respect jurors' role in the judicial process, the Department takes jury nullification and interference with official proceedings extremely seriously.
The spokeswoman added that "any group attempting to improperly influence juries who should serve as impartial arbiters of evidence should be held accountable."
Authorities have not publicly confirmed whether the Department is investigating Freedom Trainers or whether any referrals for obstruction or jury tampering are under consideration. Investigators will need to determine whether the group's coaching crosses the line from general civic education into active interference with pending federal proceedings.
Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, told the Free Beacon that the effort strikes at a foundational right.
These latest attempts challenge the constitutional right to an impartial jury and, even worse, encourage citizens to bypass laws passed by our elected representatives. This is just one more aspect of the legal system these extreme groups are trying to infiltrate.
Severino is right to zero in on the impartial-jury guarantee. The Sixth Amendment promises criminal defendants a trial by an impartial jury. That guarantee protects defendants, but it also protects the public. When organized groups train activists to conceal their intentions during voir dire and then vote based on political conviction rather than evidence, they are not exercising a right. They are hollowing out the institution that makes criminal accountability possible.
Freedom Trainers can wrap this in the language of conscience and civic courage. But the plain description of the conduct is simpler: an organized effort to place ideologically motivated jurors in federal courtrooms with instructions to acquit regardless of proof. If the Department of Justice treats that as anything less than a direct threat to the integrity of the federal trial system, it will invite every future political movement to do the same.
