WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
- U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui dismissed charges against former FBI officials Nikki Cole Floris and Bradley Benavides.
- Prosecutors accused the former officials of lying to Congress about their knowledge of Hunter Biden’s laptop and related FBI investigations.
- Faruqui called the prosecution weaponization and criticized the government’s unsigned, unsworn attempt to add obstruction charges.
- The judge struck the revised complaint after prosecutors sought to expand the case without first obtaining judicial approval.
A federal judge on Monday dismissed criminal charges against two former FBI officials accused of lying to Congress about the Hunter Biden investigation. The decision delivered a sharp rebuke to the Trump administration’s Justice Department and its handling of the prosecution, as reported by Fox News.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui dismissed the criminal complaint against former FBI officials Nikki Cole Floris and Bradley Benavides from the bench. He accused the government of weaponizing the justice system while sharply criticizing how prosecutors pursued the matter.
“What has transpired here cannot be described as anything other than weaponization,” Faruqui said. He also described the case as a “rush job” directed by President Donald Trump and FBI Director Kash Patel.

The allegations centered on what Floris and Benavides told Congress about their knowledge of Hunter Biden’s laptop. The case also involved the FBI’s handling of investigations concerning Biden ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
Republicans have long accused the FBI of improperly handling information about Hunter Biden before that election. They have alleged that political bias influenced decisions made by the bureau as the presidential contest approached.
Prosecutors alleged that Floris and Benavides made false statements during congressional interviews in 2023. According to the government, internal FBI communications and witness accounts contradicted the former officials’ descriptions of what they knew and what they did.
The dismissal followed a series of hearings in which Faruqui questioned the government’s decision to proceed through a criminal complaint rather than a grand jury indictment. He also criticized prosecutors for trying to add another charge without first obtaining judicial approval.
During a preliminary hearing the previous week, Faruqui focused on an unsigned and unsworn revised criminal complaint. Prosecutors had used that filing to seek the addition of obstruction charges without first receiving approval from a judge.
Faruqui struck the revised complaint from the record. That decision forced prosecutors to continue with their original allegations that Floris and Benavides lied to Congress about matters connected to the Hunter Biden investigation.
The judge also questioned why prosecutors had bypassed procedures normally used in such cases. Meanwhile, defense attorneys argued that the revised complaint softened the government’s original allegations about the former officials’ involvement in investigations concerning Hunter Biden.
Faruqui was appointed a U.S. magistrate judge in 2020. He has previously delivered sharp criticism of federal prosecutors handling cases under the Trump administration, including a case involving a suspect accused of plotting an assassination attempt against Trump.
The judge apologized to that suspect, Cole Allen, at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. Faruqui later criticized Allen’s treatment in jail during May, pointing specifically to the use of restraints and a safe cell.
“To me, it’s extremely disturbing that he was put in five-point restraints, a person with no criminal history. It’s troubling,” Faruqui said. “I never heard of one Jan. 6 defendant who was put in five-point restraints or in a safe cell. If the only way to keep him safe is the most punitive thing, that’s a problem.”
Faruqui has also clashed with federal prosecutors in Washington over cases brought during the Trump administration’s law enforcement surge. He accused the office of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro of overreaching by bringing certain matters in federal court.

According to Faruqui, some of those cases belonged in local court rather than the federal system. Those earlier disputes provided another example of his willingness to challenge prosecutorial decisions made under the Trump administration.
The latest ruling leaves the Justice Department facing a public judicial rebuke over both its process and its attempted expansion of the case. Fox News Digital contacted the White House and the FBI for comment following the dismissal.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.