Luigi Mangione Lawyers Say Pam Bondi’s Death Penalty Pursuit Is Tainted by Conflict of Interest, Vows to Fight Capital Punishment

NEW YORK CITY — Attorneys representing Luigi Mangione, the man accused of fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan in December 2024, have filed a dramatic court motion asserting that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s decision to pursue the death penalty is tainted by a serious conflict of interest — and that due process demands the capital punishment directive be dismissed.

In a filing submitted late Friday in federal court in Manhattan, Mangione’s defense team argued that Bondi’s previous work as a partner at Ballard Partners, a lobbying firm that previously represented UnitedHealth Group, creates a “profound conflict of interest” in the case. They contend that Bondi’s involvement in directing prosecutors to seek the death penalty — her first such decision since becoming attorney general — violated Mangione’s constitutional rights.

Defense Challenges Attorney General’s Involvement in Death Penalty Decision

Defense lawyers said in court documents that Bondi’s long-standing connections to Ballard Partners and ongoing financial ties through a profit-sharing arrangement and benefits plan with the firm should have disqualified her from overseeing capital punishment decisions in Mangione’s federal prosecution. Because Ballard Partners previously lobbied for UnitedHealth’s parent company, the defense argues that Bondi’s actions suggest an appearance of partiality.

“The Attorney General’s past and present financial interest in Ballard Partners, which continues to lobby the government on behalf of UHG and UHC, implicates Mr. Mangione’s due process rights because the very person empowered to seek his death has a financial stake in the case she is prosecuting,” the filing states.

Attorneys Seek to Bar Death Penalty, Dismiss Charges

The court filing asks a federal judge to block prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against Mangione and to dismiss or suppress certain counts of the federal indictment. The defense claims that Bondi’s public declaration of support for capital punishment — made before Mangione was formally indicted — further compromised the neutrality of the prosecution and prejudiced the case.

A hearing on this motion is scheduled for January 9 in Manhattan federal court, where defense lawyers will press their argument that Bondi’s alleged conflict of interest and public statements violated Mangione’s right to a fair trial.

Background: Federal Death Penalty Sought in High-Profile Murder

Mangione, 27, is accused of shooting Thompson, 50, outside a Midtown Manhattan hotel on December 4, 2024, as the executive was headed to an industry event. Surveillance footage captured the masked gunman firing multiple shots from behind, and investigators discovered writings in a notebook that prosecutors say expressed hostility toward the healthcare industry.

In April 2025, Attorney General Bondi publicly directed federal prosecutors to pursue the death penalty in Mangione’s case — a move that aligned with directives from the Trump administration to expand capital punishment authority and target violent crimes.

Prosecutors Defend Decision, Say Jury Process Will Be Fair

Federal prosecutors have disputed the defense’s conflict claims, saying that public comments or prior employment do not in themselves violate legal standards for impartiality. They have argued that any concerns about prejudicial publicity can be addressed through careful jury selection and instructions at trial.

In addition to the federal case, Mangione faces separate state murder and stalking charges in New York that could result in life imprisonment if convicted.

Ongoing Debate Over Fair Trial and Due Process

The legal controversy has drawn attention beyond the courtroom, sparking debate about ethics, prosecutorial discretion, and how high-profile death penalty decisions should be handled when political or financial conflicts are alleged. Defense attorneys have said they want full disclosure of any communication or compensation ties between Bondi and Ballard Partners, as well as sworn testimony from anyone with knowledge of related dealings.

As the case moves toward key pretrial hearings in early 2026, both sides are preparing for one of the most watched death penalty disputes in recent U.S. history — one that could have implications for how federally charged capital cases are prosecuted in politically sensitive contexts.