Supreme Court Case Could Help Trump in Obstruction Case

Arguments were presented before the Supreme Court on Tuesday regarding the validity of an obstruction law used against a quarter of the defendants in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

USA Today reported that the outcome of the case could potentially benefit Donald Trump, who is facing charges related to overturning the 2020 election. The decision could also have significant implications for Jan. 6 defendants charged with obstruction, as this charge could add up to 20 years to their prison sentence.

The case centers around former police officer Joseph Fischer, who was charged in the Capitol attack. Fischer argues that the law in question, passed in 2002 after the Enron scandal, was intended to target document shredding, which he claims he did not do at the Capitol.

Government attorneys argue that the law is a broad provision that includes actions such as blocking official meetings like Congress counting Electoral College votes.

Reuters reported that conservative justices expressed doubts about the obstruction charge brought by the Justice Department.

Some conservative justices posed challenging questions to Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar regarding the application of the obstruction provision in the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act to Fischer’s case.

During the hearing, Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked if the obstruction law would apply to someone who simply stood outside the Capitol and encouraged the crowd, as reported by The New York Times.

The government clarified that if there was evidence that the individual was a leader in planning to help others enter the building and disrupt the counting of electoral votes, they could be charged with obstruction.

A federal judge initially dismissed the specific charge against Fischer, but a federal appeals court majority found that the broad terms of the statute were satisfied for individuals forcibly entering the Capitol.

“The Court’s intervention suggests that the justices are seeking to provide clarity on an issue that has caused confusion in some January 6 cases,” said Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas, as reported by CNN.