Supreme Court casts doubt on hundreds of Jan 6 cases
Federal prosecutors were found to have exceeded their authority by using an obstruction law to charge hundreds of January 6 rioters, according to a Supreme Court ruling.
The decision, which may impact the case against Donald Trump, mandates that obstruction charges must demonstrate evidence of attempts to tamper with or destroy documents.
Over 350 individuals faced charges for obstructing Congress’ certification of the 2020 presidential election. The law in question, enacted in 2002 post-Enron scandal to curb corporate misconduct, imposes criminal penalties for altering or concealing records. Justice Department prosecutors sought a broad application of the law, arguing it encompassed those involved in the Capitol breach to maintain Trump’s presidency.
In a 6-3 decision crossing usual ideological lines, the Supreme Court ruled for a narrower interpretation, limiting the law’s scope to those who tamper with documents. The ruling has heartened Trump supporters.
Regarding Trump’s separate legal challenges, including potential immunity for his actions, legal experts like Aziz Huq from the University of Chicago Law School anticipate ongoing litigation. However, the decision likely won’t undermine charges against him that involve falsifying or altering records, documents, or objects.
In addition, Special Counsel Jack Smith has also charged Trump with other crimes in connection with his attempts to overturn the 2020 result: Conspiring to defraud the US and conspiring against the rights of citizens.
Those charges will go ahead regardless of the outcome of the obstruction case.
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.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was one of a number of laws used against those who stormed the Capitol in January 2021.
About 25% of Capitol riot defendants were prosecuted under the law, and according to Attorney General Merrick Garland, all of those faced additional charges.
“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.
The case was brought to the Supreme Court by Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania who attended Trump’s rally in Washington on 6 January 2021, then briefly went inside the Capitol.
He was seen arguing with police on video before leaving the building.
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.
