{"id":27976,"date":"2024-07-01T05:20:12","date_gmt":"2024-07-01T09:20:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/?p=27976"},"modified":"2024-07-01T05:20:12","modified_gmt":"2024-07-01T09:20:12","slug":"supreme-court-casts-doubt-on-hundreds-of-jan-6-cases","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/2024\/07\/01\/supreme-court-casts-doubt-on-hundreds-of-jan-6-cases\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court casts doubt on hundreds of Jan 6 cases"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Federal prosecutors overreached when using an obstruction law to charge hundreds of January 6 rioters, the Supreme Court has ruled in an opinion that could also affect a case against Donald Trump.<\/b><\/p>\n

The justices ruled that obstruction charges must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents.<\/p>\n

More than 350 people have been charged with obstructing Congress\u2019 business – the certification of the 2020 presidential election.<\/p>\n

The law that prosecutors used was passed in 2002, after the Enron scandal, to stop corporate misconduct.<\/p>\n

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act outlines criminal penalties for anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object”, and another clause includes anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding”.<\/p>\n

Justice department prosecutors argued for a broad interpretation of the law to include those who broke into the Capitol on 6 January 2021 in an attempt to keep Trump in the White House.<\/p>\n

But in a 6-3 opinion which cut across the Supreme Court’s usual ideological lines, the court ruled that the law should be interpreted relatively narrowly – and used only against defendants who tampered with documents.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

How will the decision affect the Trump case?<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

The ruling has cheered supporters of Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

While the court introduced another wrinkle into the special prosecution of the former president – and the Supreme Court could rule\u00a0in a separate case expected next week<\/a>\u00a0that he has immunity for his actions – it is unclear whether the decision will halt one of the charges against him.<\/p>\n

“For Trump, I think there will be litigation,” said Aziz Huq, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School.<\/p>\n

“But the charges against him involve falsifying or altering ‘records, documents, or objects’. So I think it likely doesn\u2019t undermine those charges.”<\/p>\n

In addition, Special Counsel Jack Smith has also\u00a0charged Trump<\/a>\u00a0with other crimes in connection with his attempts to overturn the 2020 result: Conspiring to defraud the US and conspiring against the rights of citizens.<\/p>\n

Those charges will go ahead regardless of the outcome of the obstruction case.<\/p>\n

The special prosecutor faces an obvious deadline. If Trump wins the November election, he will be able to remove Mr Smith from his post and end the federal legal case.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\"Joseph<\/picture><\/span><\/div>\n
Joseph Fischer (centre, holding phone) briefly entered the Capitol and encountered police officers on 6 January 2021 (Image: US Department of Justice)<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n
\n

<\/h2>\n

What about the other Jan 6 defendants?<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was one of a number of laws used against those who stormed the Capitol in January 2021.<\/p>\n

About 25% of Capitol riot defendants were prosecuted under the law, and according to Attorney General Merrick Garland, all of those faced additional charges.<\/p>\n

“The vast majority of the more than 1,400 defendants charged for their illegal actions on January 6 will not be affected by this decision,” Mr Garland said in a statement issued after the decision in which he also noted he was disappointed with the ruling.<\/p>\n

The case was brought to the Supreme Court by Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania who attended Trump\u2019s rally in Washington on 6 January 2021, then briefly went inside the Capitol.<\/p>\n

He was seen arguing with police on video before leaving the building.<\/p>\n

Lower courts will now decide whether the obstruction charge against him can continue. However, Mr Fischer also faces trial on a number of other charges including civil disorder, disorderly conduct and assaulting, resisting or impeding a police officer.<\/p>\n