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.
> 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.<
Wasn’t that true? Something from the past comes to mind.
DT should have had a tall iron fence built around the Capital.
Didn’t the worms want or do that? Was it built?
Also didn’t DT ask for help from Pulooso and didn’t get it?
Bears repeating.
Most of the victory of the Left and defeat of the Right hinges on the Right accepting the lying premise of the Left and then debating the Left on the details. If you accept your opponent's premise, you've lost, you just don't know it yet.
What is that? What is "The Swamp"? Same thing as "The Deep State".
Both are the 80%+, $3+ trillion unconstitutional potion of the federal government.
Seems easy for the Right to say "The Swamp" or "The Deep State" but unconstitutional governmental laws, agencies, and acts seems to get stuck in their throat.
Again, the GREATEST threat to our lives, liberties, and wellbeing isn't NATO, China, or the Man in the Moon. Our greatest threat is our own mostly unconstitutional federal government which is now essentially totalitarian and if not dismantled will destroy America and the God-given liberties of her poeple.
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.