Federal prosecutors will seek new charges against Trayon White, setting up a second bribery trial

What happened in court today

Twelve days before D.C. voters head to the polls, federal prosecutors told a judge Thursday morning they plan to retry D.C. Council member Trayon White Sr. on bribery charges, and that they intend to pursue a superseding indictment that could carry additional counts beyond the single charge that ended in a hung jury last month.

The announcement came at a status conference before U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rebecca Ross made the announcement and said she anticipates May as the earliest possible start date for a new trial. That timeline means White, who represents Ward 8 and was re-elected to that seat just last year, would remain on the council, with a vote, a salary, and constituent services responsibilities, while federal prosecutors build what they say will be a stronger case against him.

The previous trial did not go cleanly for the government. A federal judge declared White's case a mistrial after the jury informed the court it was hopelessly deadlocked. White said the jury split 9 to 3 in favor of acquitting him before the mistrial was declared.

Federal prosecutors told Judge Contreras that they will retry their bribery case against White (D-Ward 8), and that they plan to seek a superseding indictment, a move that could introduce additional charges. The government did not detail in open court what new charges it is considering, but a superseding indictment typically signals prosecutors believe the original charge sheet was too narrow, or that new evidence or legal theories have emerged since the first trial.

What the original case was about

White pleaded not guilty to a single federal bribery charge stemming from allegations that he accepted $35,000 in cash from D.C. businessman Allieu Kamara in 2024 in exchange for using his position on the D.C. Council to help Kamara secure or renew city contracts.

The defense's strategy at trial was telling. White's attorneys did not dispute that he accepted the money. Instead, they argued prosecutors failed to prove that White intended to be influenced in exchange for the cash, a required element of the charge. Prosecutors contend White agreed to use his public position to advocate for Kamara's business interests.

The jury's deliberations exposed just how fine that line is. At one point, jurors asked whether it would constitute bribery if White accepted money to perform an official act but never intended to follow through on the agreement. Judge Contreras instructed the jury that it would not. That instruction may have given some jurors enough daylight to vote for acquittal.

The broader alleged scheme ran deeper than a single handshake. White is accused of accepting $35,000 in cash from an FBI informant in exchange for his influence in securing city contracts. The government also alleged White agreed to a 3% kickback on all contracts he helped secure. Charging documents put the total value of the alleged bribery scheme at $156,000 in bribes in exchange for directing government money to his preferred anti-violence organizations.

Kamara, the informant at the center of the case, was himself in legal jeopardy when he began cooperating. Kamara became a government informant after being caught taking out fraudulent PPP loans. When confronted by the FBI, Kamara admitted to bribing three D.C. city officials, including Trayon White. That admission led the FBI to ask Kamara to revive his relationship with White in 2024 in an attempt to recreate the bribery situation. The FBI installed a hidden camera in Kamara's car. The government had footage showing White taking envelopes with money from Kamara on June 26, July 17, July 25, and August 9, 2024.

The defense fires back, and raises race

White's lead attorney, Gary Kohlman, did not take the government's announcement quietly. Kohlman told Judge Contreras the DOJ's decision is 'the last nail in the coffin' about his good faith in the government in this case.

Then Kohlman went further. Kohlman told the judge he believed the move was orchestrated by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, and accused Pirro of targeting White because he is African American. It is a serious allegation, and one that puts Pirro, a Trump appointee who has been a polarizing figure since taking over the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, at the center of a public argument about selective prosecution in a majority-Black city.

The financial stakes for White himself are real. Kohlman said if the government is successful in getting another indictment and retrying White, it is unlikely White can afford to continue paying his same defense team. White's attorney said the cost of litigating another trial could leave the council member defenseless.

One number matters above all others to the defense's public argument: the jury split 9 to 3 in favor of acquittal, according to White's attorney. That is not an acquittal. But it is not nothing, either, and Kohlman has leaned on it at every public opportunity.

Where this leaves White, and Ward 8

White's political journey since his arrest has been extraordinary by any measure. Following his arrest, White was ousted from office in a unanimous vote by his fellow D.C. Council members. He then reclaimed his Ward 8 seat after winning a special election last year to fill the vacancy created by his dismissal. Voters in one of the city's most economically distressed wards sent him back to the John A. Wilson Building. Now they will watch, again, as the federal government tries a second time to end his tenure for good.

The potential consequence for White personally is not abstract. A conviction would carry a potential 15-year prison sentence and would cost him his seat on the council. That outcome would trigger yet another Ward 8 special election, in a ward that has now held two in recent years.

Thursday's hearing did not resolve everything. The judge did not rule Thursday on White's motion for an acquittal, which could prevent the government from trying him again at all. That ruling, whenever it comes, will determine whether a retrial happens or the case ends here. Contreras gave no timeline from the bench.

The Pirro factor

Kohlman's decision to name Pirro directly is politically charged in ways that go beyond this single case. Pirro was appointed by the Trump administration and has pursued a number of high-profile cases in the District. Prosecutors intend to seek a new indictment and proceed with a new trial against White, a proposal met with strong opposition from White's defense attorneys, who said the lawmaker was being unfairly targeted in part because of his race. The defense's public strategy appears designed, at least in part, to shape the narrative in Ward 8 ahead of any eventual retrial, in a ward where White retains visible community support.

Whether the racial-targeting argument finds traction in court is another matter. Judges set a high bar for dismissing cases on selective-prosecution grounds. The defense would need to show both that the government singled White out based on race and that similarly situated individuals of other races were not prosecuted. That is rarely an easy showing to make with the evidentiary record available before a retrial even begins.

What D.C. Residents Should Watch

• The acquittal motion ruling. Judge Contreras has not yet decided whether to grant White's motion for a judgment of acquittal. If he grants it, there is no retrial. If he denies it, the superseding indictment process begins. Watch for that ruling in the coming weeks.
• What the new indictment says. A superseding indictment could add charges. Whether those are additional bribery counts, other corruption-related offenses, or something else entirely will define how much larger and more complex a second trial becomes.
• White's council work in the meantime. White sits on council committees and votes on legislation affecting all eight wards. His colleagues have not moved to remove him again. Watch whether that changes if new charges land.
• The May trial window. Prosecutors named May as the earliest possible start date for a new trial. That puts any verdict well into the tenure of whoever wins the mayor's race on November 3, and into the next council term, meaning the political context around this case will look different by the time it reaches a new jury.
• Kohlman's departure. If White cannot afford to retain Gary Kohlman and his team for a second trial, the shift in defense counsel alone could meaningfully change how the case is argued and perceived.

Sources: WTOP; WJLA/7News; The Washington Post; NBC Washington; FOX 5 DC; DC News Now; Washington Times (mistrial background); Washington Sun