WASHINGTON, D.C., US: Attorneys representing Luigi Mangione, the Maryland man accused of orchestrating the high-profile assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Thomas Ellison, have filed a motion in federal court requesting the dismissal of all charges against their client. The defense argues that federal prosecutors overstepped jurisdictional limits and relied on what they describe as “unsubstantiated, circumstantial evidence” lacking direct connection to Mangione.
A Case That Shook Corporate America
The assassination of Thomas Ellison, who was gunned down outside the company’s headquarters in Minneapolis in March 2025, sent shockwaves through corporate circles and the broader healthcare industry. Federal authorities quickly labeled it a targeted hit, suggesting Ellison’s stance on certain health benefit policies might have ignited personal or financial grievances among individuals affected by corporate decisions.
Within weeks of Ellison’s death, investigators traced surveillance footage and financial records to Mangione, a former healthcare consultant with ties to multiple medical insurance contractors. Mangione was arrested in early May on federal conspiracy, murder-for-hire, and obstruction charges. Prosecutors described him as the alleged “architect of the operation,” accusing him of recruiting intermediaries to carry out the fatal attack.
Also Read
Defense Counters with Jurisdictional Challenge
In their 72-page dismissal motion filed Friday, Mangione’s defense team contends that federal prosecutors “exceeded constitutional boundaries” by pursuing a case that should have been handled by Minnesota’s state courts. The lawyers argue that no federal nexus exists and that the government’s reliance on interstate communication statutes is “a flimsy attempt to create federal standing.”
Lead defense attorney Karen DelVecchio said in a statement: “There is no credible proof that Mr. Mangione engaged in or directed any criminal conduct. The prosecution’s narrative is built on innuendo rather than admissible evidence. The federal government has grossly overreached by transforming a tragic homicide into a political theater of national scope.”
Prosecutors Maintain the Federal Connection
Federal prosecutors, however, maintain that Mangione’s use of encrypted communication platforms and interstate wire transfers to fund the alleged plot clearly elevates the case to federal jurisdiction. They argue that several key financial exchanges tied to crypto-wallets and out-of-state intermediaries connect Mangione to the conspiracy across state lines.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin Rhodes, speaking outside the U.S. District Court, asserted, “The evidence demonstrates clear coordination of resources and communication across multiple states. The federal charge is not only appropriate but essential to ensuring justice for the victim and his family.”
Growing Tensions Between Sides
The court filing has intensified tensions between federal prosecutors and the defense team, which has repeatedly accused the government of leaking prejudicial information to the media. In recent hearings, defense attorneys pressed for measures to restrict pretrial publicity, arguing that public opinion has been “irreversibly skewed” by portrayals of Mangione as a mastermind figure.
Judge Rebecca Hall, presiding over the case, has cautioned both parties against “trial by headline” and emphasized the need to protect jury impartiality. “This court will decide based on evidence presented in this courtroom—not on press statements or speculation circulated online,” Hall said during a preliminary hearing last month.
Background on Luigi Mangione
Mangione, 49, is a former regional director for a health analytics firm and was once contracted as a consultant by several major insurance providers, including branches affiliated with UnitedHealthcare. Colleagues have described him as “brilliant but volatile,” with a record of contentious relationships within the healthcare business sector.
Court records show that Mangione filed several lawsuits over the past decade against corporate entities, alleging unfair business practices and unpaid commissions. Investigators have suggested a pattern of financial strain and professional animosity that may have laid the foundation for motive, though the defense dismisses these as “irrelevant grievances.”
A Complicated Web of Evidence
Evidence presented in pretrial disclosures includes encrypted messages, offshore accounts, and what prosecutors call “encrypted digital footprints” linking Mangione to an intermediary known only as “Rico.” The government claims “Rico” arranged the hit carried out by two unidentified gunmen who remain at large.
However, defense attorneys insist that the data used to trace these accounts is inadmissible, claiming it was obtained through an invalid digital warrant and in violation of the Fourth Amendment. They further argue that the messages prosecutors rely on cannot be conclusively attributed to Mangione, citing disputed metadata and incomplete server logs.
The Victim and Corporate Fallout
Thomas Ellison, 56, had led UnitedHealthcare since 2020 and was widely regarded as a reform-minded executive. His assassination sent shockwaves through the healthcare and insurance industries, with the company temporarily destabilized in market value following his death.
In the months after the incident, UnitedHealthcare implemented increased security protocols for executives and resumed leadership under interim CEO Margaret Choi. In an internal company memo, Choi wrote that Ellison’s “commitment to ethical reform and transparency remains a guiding light for our mission.”
Public and Political Reactions
The case has prompted broader debate in Washington on executive security and the potential for politically or financially motivated violence in the private sector. Some legislators have cited the Ellison assassination as an example of rising aggression against business leaders amid growing public frustration over healthcare costs and corporate accountability.
Civil rights groups, however, warn against framing the event as a symbol of systemic unrest, saying it risks stigmatizing legitimate protest against corporate malpractice. Mangione’s legal team has echoed that sentiment, asserting that the case is being politically dramatized to “send a message” through the judicial system.
What Comes Next
Judge Hall has scheduled a hearing for October 24 to address the motion to dismiss. If the motion is denied, the trial is expected to proceed early next year, and could last months given the complexity of digital and financial evidence.
Legal analysts suggest that while dismissal is unlikely, the motion may succeed in limiting the scope of certain federal charges. “Even if the court doesn’t throw out the entire case, parts of it—especially those involving disputed encryption data—might be excluded,” said retired federal prosecutor Harold Baines.
Mangione remains held at a federal detention facility in Virginia without bond. His team has also filed a separate motion seeking his temporary release under strict home confinement, citing health concerns and lack of prior violent offenses.
A Nation Watching
With its mix of corporate intrigue, digital forensics, and cross-state conspiracies, the case against Luigi Mangione has become one of the most closely watched federal prosecutions of 2025. Both the defense and prosecutors are preparing for what could become a landmark legal battle—one poised to test how far federal authorities can stretch their reach in crimes involving corporate America.
As the next court date approaches, questions linger over the strength of the evidence and the motives behind the assassination. For now, both sides appear determined to fight to the end—one seeking vindication, the other demanding justice for a slain executive who became a symbol of reform in one of America’s most powerful industries.
