Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court accepts Jan. 6 case that could affect Trump prosecution
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/13/jan-6-obstruction-supreme-court-trump-rioters/ ^ | 12.13.23 | Robert Barnes

Posted on 12/13/2023 7:57:37 AM PST by spacejunkie2001

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took up a challenge to a law used to charge hundreds of people in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, which also has been levied against former President Donald Trump.

Keeping up with politics is easy with The 5-Minute Fix Newsletter, in your inbox weekdays. An appeals court said the government could proceed with prosecuting defendants charged under a federal law that makes it a crime to obstruct or impede an official proceeding — in this case, disruption of Congress’s formal certification of President Biden’s 2020 election.

Obstruction is also one of the four counts brought against Trump by special counsel Jack Smith in his federal election-obstruction case. It is unclear how the court’s acceptance of the case involving other defendants might complicate plans for Trump’s trial, which is currently scheduled for March 4.

In October, the Department of Justice said in a news release that 327 Jan. 6 defendants had been charged with obstruction of an official proceeding.

(Excerpt) Read more at webcache.googleusercontent.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: j6; supremecourt

1 posted on 12/13/2023 7:57:37 AM PST by spacejunkie2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Does the Supreme Court know the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot was a demonut party setup ?


2 posted on 12/13/2023 8:00:33 AM PST by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Government is lucrative for the participants. Trump is a threat to the revenue stream. There aren’t many members of the political class that sincerely support Trump. Most are actively trying to damage Trump, including SCOTUS.


3 posted on 12/13/2023 8:04:10 AM PST by brownsfan (It's going to take real, serious, hard times to wake the American public.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

How soon will all the other obstructionists since Jan 6 be prosecuted?


4 posted on 12/13/2023 8:08:15 AM PST by RWGinger (FJB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

As long as it doesn’t come down to Roberts as the deciding vote, we might be OK.


5 posted on 12/13/2023 8:08:18 AM PST by Fido969 (45 is Superman! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: butlerweave

Their job is not to try the facts in the case. Their job is to rule if the law is being applied properly and is constitutional.

It will be interesting to see arguments if the law was ever enforced before...or after Jan 6.

EC


6 posted on 12/13/2023 8:09:16 AM PST by Ex-Con777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

While I agree the SC is also very aware of how their decisions will impact things far beyond the impact it may have on Trump.

Hopefully sanity will prevail.


7 posted on 12/13/2023 8:09:46 AM PST by fuzzylogic (welfare state = sharing of poor moral choices among everybody)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fuzzylogic

“Hopefully sanity will prevail.”

There is very little that would convince me that sanity has any value in today’s world.


8 posted on 12/13/2023 8:25:19 AM PST by brownsfan (It's going to take real, serious, hard times to wake the American public.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Hopefully the SCOTUS will rule that Trump has immunity and put a end to the dimwits trying to railroad him for political reasons


9 posted on 12/13/2023 8:46:54 AM PST by wild74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Roberts whispers to jack Smith...get him


10 posted on 12/13/2023 8:52:04 AM PST by South Dakota (Patriotism is the new terrorism .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wild74
Hopefully the SCOTUS will rule that Trump has immunity and put a end to the dimwits trying to railroad him for political reasons

OMG, did you fall and hit your head?

11 posted on 12/13/2023 8:57:16 AM PST by BlackbirdSST (Trump or Bust! Long live the Republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

Not at all, I know they are railroading him and I also know he will be the GOP nominee if they don’t succeed in their attempt at railroading him. If he wins this case I will be on the Trump train but until that time DeSantis all the way, he is the backup plan


12 posted on 12/13/2023 9:22:23 AM PST by wild74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

I wonder if they’re concerned with the charge or the sentences.


13 posted on 12/13/2023 9:25:26 AM PST by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Maybe the SCOTUS is now playing the “it is under investigation game” that is regularly used by DOJ and FBI when they want to stall something.


14 posted on 12/13/2023 9:27:22 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

This will be the moment of truth for Kavanaugh. He will finally be revealed for who he is.


15 posted on 12/13/2023 9:40:44 AM PST by Rlsau1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001
The problem is that Jack Smith posed the question to the Supreme Court as 'complete immunity for ANY crime' this is overly broad.

The question should be if President Trump has complete immunity for the charges Trump is being charged.

The second part of the question is that since Trump was already indicted (impeached) for the same charges by congress and was acquitted of the same by the Senate, then charging Trump for the second time does it constitute 'double jeopardy'?

I argue yes, since the threshold for guilty is much broad in congress than in the justice system since the charges do not need to be proven 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

As Robert Gouveia Esq explains in: Jack Smith petition this is an attempt by Jack Smith to keep the date of the trial to March 4th to cause the most damage to Trump's election efforts (election interference)

The Supreme court should reject Jack Smith's extraordinary request that the Supreme take the case before the appellate court has a chance to act on it, and should take the case only after the normal course of business, after the decision of the appellate court. The only reason to rush is for election interference.

16 posted on 12/13/2023 9:57:38 AM PST by Toughluck_freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

It would appear that Jack is spending quite a bit of his power cash on this move. Risk is high for both Trump and Smith. Either Smith has confidence that he has traction, or he’s pulling a desperate emotional move.

So far he’s been acting emotional.


17 posted on 12/13/2023 10:08:22 AM PST by lurk (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson