A New York State Supreme Court judge has dismissed the terrorism counts against Luigi Mangione, the 27-year-old accused of ambushing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan last December. Justice Gregory Carro ruled the state failed to meet New York’s legal threshold for terrorism, finding the indictment “legally insufficient” on those counts. The core state case—second-degree murder and related charges—still stands.
Current State of Events
The dismissal doesn’t free Mangione. He remains charged in New York with second-degree murder and weapons offenses. In a parallel federal case, prosecutors have charged him with murder and related counts; that track still exposes him to the possibility of a death sentence. The dual posture—state prison time on one path, federal capital exposure on the other—will define the fight from here.
Why “Terrorism” Didn’t Stick
New York’s terrorism statute isn’t a catch-all for crimes with a political flavor. The state must show intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or influence government policy through intimidation or coercion.
Carro concluded the state’s papers didn’t clear that bar, even as prosecutors argued Mangione’s writings and statements were steeped in anti-health-insurance animus. That’s the crucial line: ideology alone doesn’t equal terrorism under state law without the specific intent elements.
The Case in Brief
Thompson, chief of UnitedHealthcare (the insurance arm of UnitedHealth Group), was gunned down near a Manhattan hotel on December 4, 2024. Surveillance video captured a masked shooter; Mangione was arrested days later. Prosecutors say his own notes—diaries and a short manifesto—reveal a target set by rage toward the health-insurance industry rather than any personal grudge. Defense lawyers call those writings inflammatory sideshows that shouldn’t define statutory intent.
What You Might Not Know
- Double jeopardy push failed (for now): Mangione’s lawyers tried to nuke the state indictment on double jeopardy grounds, arguing the twin state and federal prosecutions were constitutionally defective. Carro rejected that claim. The two tracks roll on.
- The paper trail matters: Beyond the video, prosecutors have leaned on Mangione’s own writing—diaries and a purported confession—to pitch motive. The defense has attacked the use and publicity around those documents, arguing the disclosures skew the jury pool.
- Evidence fights ahead: The defense has moved to suppress evidence taken during Mangione’s arrest in Pennsylvania, a dispute that could reshape what a jury eventually sees. Expect hard litigation here; suppression could narrow the state’s narrative even without the terrorism label.
- Support in the gallery: Mangione’s first New York appearance since February drew a visible crowd—green-clad supporters in “FREE LUIGI” shirts—telegraphing that the case has a live, organized following.
- Profile detail: AP reports Mangione is an Ivy League graduate, a well-known biographical note likely to surface at trial as both sides craft motive and means.
What the Law Actually Says
Lawfare’s earlier analysis is a useful decoder ring: Mangione’s state indictment originally stacked eleven counts, including two terrorism-based murder charges—first-degree murder “in furtherance of an act of terrorism” and second-degree murder as a crime of terrorism under Penal Law §§ 490.05 and 490.25. Those are the counts Carro tossed. The rest survive, keeping the path to a life sentence in state court alive even as the terrorism label falls away.
The Federal Hammer
Separate from Albany’s definitions, the Justice Department’s case is built around murder with a firearm and stalking-related counts tied to an ideologically framed killing. That prosecution remains intact—and it’s the one with capital exposure. The state’s narrowed indictment doesn’t touch DOJ’s strategy or options.
Parallels Between Mangione and Charlie Kirk’s Suspected Killer
Two public killings—two young suspects. In New York, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was shot outside the New York Hilton Midtown on Dec. 4, 2024. In Utah, conservative activist Charlie Kirk was shot during a campus event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025. Both attacks landed in front of cameras and crowds, designed—or at least carried out—in places where message and spectacle collide.
The Guns—and the Writing on the Brass
Prosecutors say Luigi Mangione carried out his deadly mission with a partly DIY arsenal: a ghost gun capable of firing 9mm paired with a 3D-printed suppressor. Federal filings say casings at the scene bore the words “deny,” “delay,” and “depose”—a sneer ripped from insurance-industry jargon.
In Utah, investigators recovered what the FBI called a high-powered, bolt-action rifle, found discarded in a wooded area near the campus. State officials say inscribed casings accompanied that rifle, with taunting or political messages—one phrase read, “Hey, fascist! Catch!” according to briefings and local reporting.
The Manhunts and the Takedowns
Both suspects were caught fast by modern standards—and with help. Mangione was grabbed five days after the New York killing at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, after a tipster recognized him. Tyler Robinson, the Utah suspect, was in cuffs in roughly 33 hours, a timeline the FBI laid out while crediting family tips and a surge of public leads. Different states, similar tempo: quick IDs, relentless canvassing, and no place to hide once the photos hit the nightly news.
Charges, Death Penalty, and the Two-Track Problem
New York threw out “terrorism” counts against Mangione on Sept. 16, 2025—the judge said the evidence didn’t meet the statute’s specific intent requirement—but the state second-degree murder case remains. Separately, the federal case still looms; prosecutors are pursuing the death penalty there. That’s the true thunderhead in Mangione’s legal weather.
Utah prosecutors, meanwhile, are preparing capital charges against Robinson for Kirk’s assassination; aggravated murder in Utah can be death-eligible. Federal authorities are reviewing the case, but as of now, this remains primarily a state homicide prosecution with capital exposure.
The Paper (and Digital) Trails
In New York, the state and feds point to Mangione’s writings—a diary and a confession-style note—as motive evidence tied to rage against the health insurance industry. Those documents are still the subject of suppression fights, along with the ghost gun and IDs seized in Pennsylvania.
In Utah, investigators say Robinson left a note expressing intent, and they’ve flagged an alleged Discord confession along with DNA purportedly linking him to the recovered rifle and tools found at the sniper’s perch. Officials have also referenced the inscribed casings as potential motive breadcrumbs. One thing we did not find credible sourcing for: claims that Robinson “cracked jokes” on social media hours after the attack.
Where the Parallels Break
New York’s terrorism law is narrow by design; as stated, ideology alone doesn’t make a murder “terrorism” without proof of an intent to intimidate a civilian population or influence government. That’s why the judge chopped those counts in the Mangione indictment. Utah authorities haven’t framed Robinson’s case under a state terrorism statute; they’re building a classic aggravated-murder file, with bolt-action ballistics and old-fashioned admissions doing the heavy lifting. Different statutes, different levers—similar endgame.
Why This Matters
Both cases show the same grim pattern: message-laden shootings against high-profile figures, followed by fast arrests thanks to public tips, surveillance, and digital footprints. In court, the battles now pivot to what the jury gets to see—the writings, the inscriptions, the ghost-gun mechanics, the Discord logs. For Mangione, the biggest risk sits in federal court. For Robinson, the next move is formal charges and the state’s capital calculus. Either way, the through-line is clear: when killers try to turn bullets into slogans, prosecutors turn every letter, every round, and every click into evidence.
What’s Next
More pretrial trench warfare: suppression battles over Pennsylvania-seized materials, continued skirmishing over what the jury can hear about motive, and scheduling between two sovereigns. The terrorism headline is gone in state court, but the murder case is very much alive against Mangione, and the federal track could become the decisive arena.