The US Supreme Court overturns obstruction charge related to January 6, 2021, Capitol riot

Many of the people who were arrested and charged for the Capitol Hill riot of January 6, 2021, were charged with obstruction among their other charges. One the defendants in the government’s case against the rioters challenged the obstruction charge. This challenged reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The latter ultimately sided with the defendant, Joseph Fischer. The Supreme Court found that the government broadly applied the law and returned the case to the appeals court. The Supreme Court’s decision impacts other J6 cases involving the obstruction charge.

From Fox News:

In a 6-3 decision, the high court held to a narrower interpretation of a federal statute that imposes criminal liability on anyone who corruptly “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.”

The ruling reverses a lower court decision, which the high court said swept too broadly into areas like peaceful but disruptive conduct, and returns the case to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, who will have the opportunity to reassess the case with Friday’s ruling in mind.

The case stems from a lawsuit filed by Joseph Fischer — one of more than 300 people charged by the Justice Department with “obstruction of an official proceeding” in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. His lawyers argued that the federal statute should not apply, and that it had only ever been applied to evidence-tampering cases.

The Justice Department argued that Fischer’s actions were a “deliberate attempt” to stop a joint session of Congress directly from certifying the 2020 election, thus qualifying their use of the statute that criminalizes behavior that “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do” and carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.

However, Chief Justice John Roberts said the government stretched the law too far.

“Although the Government’s all-encompassing interpretation may be literally permissible, it defies the most plausible understanding” of why certain provisions of the statute were put together, “and it renders an unnerving amount of statutory text mere surplusage,” Roberts wrote in the opinion of the court.

Additional Reading:

Herlihy, B., Pandolfo, C., Mears, B. & Bream, S. (2024, June 28). Supreme Court rules in favor of Jan. 6 Capitol riot participant who challenged obstruction conviction. Fox News. Link.

Category: Government Incompetence, SCOTUS, Society