Posted on 06/29/2024 6:23:06 AM PDT by george76
The decision could have implications for charges against Trump..
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the Justice Department went too far in slapping obstruction charges on hundreds of January 6 defendants.
The court voted 6-3 in favor of defendant Joseph Fischer, a former police officer seeking to dismiss his charge of obstructing an official proceeding, Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s election victory.
However, the court ruled that an obstruction charge may be filed if prosecutors are able to prove that a protester was trying to stop the arrival of certificates used to count electoral votes to certify the election results, not just force their way into the Capitol Building.
The decision could have implications for former President Donald Trump, who is also charged with obstruction, although special counsel Jack Smith has argued that Trump’s obstruction of Congress’ certification was much broader than the protesters’ actions.
It could also force prosecutors to reopen at least some of the January 6 cases.
The court determined that the law designating obstruction as a felony was not meant to be interpreted so broadly. The 2002 statute, enacted as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act after the Enron accounting scandal, was only meant to apply in cases involving tampering with physical evidence, the court ruled.
Chief Justice John Roberts penned the opinion for the majority.
He noted that the “breach of the Capitol delayed the certification of the vote” but said the law never intended for these defendants to be sentenced to decades in prison.
“Nothing in the text or statutory history suggests that [the law] is designed to impose up to 20 years’ imprisonment on essentially all defendants who commit obstruction of justice in any way and who might be subject to lesser penalties under more specific obstruction statutes,” Roberts wrote.
Fischer faces a total of seven criminal charges, including assaulting a police officer and entering a restricted building, beyond the obstruction charge.
“The Supreme Court’s narrowed definition of this statute is a victory against government overreach when it comes to applying vague criminal statutes to defendants and situations never intended by Congress. It is more than clear that what happened on January 6th did not involve document destruction or witness tampering—as the statute indicates,” said John Malcolm, a former federal prosecutor who is vice president of the Heritage Foundation’s Institute for Constitutional Government.
Attorney General Merrick Garland reacted to the court’s ruling with dismay, saying he was “disappointed by today’s decision, which limits an important federal statute that the Department has sought to use to ensure that those most responsible for that attack face appropriate consequences.”
A total of 247 January 6 cases could be affected by the court’s ruling in favor of Fischer, but only 52 of those have obstruction as the only felony offense.
A total of 27 defendants are currently in prison with obstruction as their only felony offense.
More than 1,400 people were charged for their actions on January 6.
SET THEM FREE!
Garland remains on the negative side of meritless.
Interesting because they only used the part of the law they liked and ignored part B which was attached.
“[Roberts] noted that the ‘breach of the Capitol delayed the certification of the vote’ but said the law never intended for these defendants to be sentenced to decades in prison.
‘Nothing in the text or statutory history suggests that [the law] is designed to impose up to 20 years’ imprisonment on essentially all defendants who commit obstruction of justice in any way and who might be subject to lesser penalties under more specific obstruction statutes,’ Roberts wrote.”
WOW! Fantastic! Now get your butt over to the prison and LET THEM OUT! NOW!
everyone one of them should have been immediately ordered freed!
instead each one will have to fight in court to be released!!!!
this is nuts!
You think this makes a bit of difference to democrats?
Both the judges and persecutors went along with that; they all need to be Nifonged.
Attorney General Merrick Garland reacted to the court’s ruling with dismay, saying he was “disappointed by today’s decision, which limits an important federal statute that the Department has sought to use to ensure that those most responsible for that attack face appropriate consequences.”
What is missing from that statement? “The law”. The law determines the consequences, not Merrick Garland.
this is nuts!"
Of course it is, but given the vindictiveness of the Never Trump cabal, those prisoners would likely face additional charges of some sort or another to keep them in jail.
The law itself is NOT in legalese...They just forgot to read what would constitute “Obstruction of a Proceeding”. Really a simple a,b,c reading. Makes me go Grrrrrrrr.
Free the J6’ers, free Navarro, and free Bannon.
Watch as the JOD acts as if the ruling does not exist, especially in regard to Trump.
“The court determined that the law designating obstruction as a felony was not meant to be interpreted so broadly.”
All of the Republican judges went along with the Democrat judges in persecuting the J6 protesters.
They are a disgrace.
Everyone who vetted, nominated and confirmed these judges failed.
Federalist Society: https://fedsoc.org
Heritage Foundation: https://www.heritage.org/judicialtracker
Senate Republicans: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members
BTTT
The breach did not delay certification of the vote. Quite the opposite. It stopped the objection to certain states’ results which would have sent the issue back to state legislatures to be settled.
But don’t let an agenda get in the way of the real story.
EC
That would be the Speaker of the House Emerita, Nanny P. who confessed that it was all her responsibility. She will use her "Big D" get out of jail free card.
"Supreme Court Rules DOJ Overstepped [??? emphasis added] In Charging Hundreds Of January 6 Defendants With Obstruction"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
"Weaponized the law" might be a more accurate term than Supreme Court-sanitized "overstepped."
In other words, DOJ response to J6 might deserve penalties and / or jail time under 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law.
"Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death." --18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law
Constitution-respecting Trump supporters need to effectively "impeach and remove" worthless, OBiden-supporting state and federal career lawmakers and executives in November. Democratic and Republican patriots need to support hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.
The lefties will do everything in their power to keep them jailed indefinitely.
With this administration's actions...it can no longer lecture other nations on "human rights"...which included senior abuse of a man they drugged-up/propped-up/masqueraded as the leader of the free-world.
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.