It has been noted that Supreme Court justices on Tuesday raised concerns about the Justice Department’s use of an obstruction statute to charge those involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol via NBC News.
Well, the case that could have a bearing on the election interference prosecution of former President Donald Trump. The justices heard an appeal which was brought by defendant Joseph Fischer, a former police officer who is seeking to dismiss a charge accusing him of obstructing an official proceeding, namely the certification by Congress of Joe Biden’s election victory, which was disrupted by a mob of Trump supporters.
The law in question criminalizes efforts to obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding. It seems that conviction can result in a prison sentence of up to 20 years.
The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has in the past been skeptical of prosecutors when they assert broad applications of criminal provisions.
Some justices expressed similar sentiments during Tuesday’s arguments, asking whether the statute in question could be used to prosecute peaceful protesters, including people who at times have disrupted Supreme Court proceedings.
“Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify?” conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch asked. “Would a heckler in today’s audience qualify, or at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote, qualify for 20 years in federal prison?”
Justice Samuel Alito, another conservative also asked similar questions during a lengthy exchange with Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar in which he noted that people who have protested at the Supreme Court were not charged under the law.
“I think it’s in a fundamentally different posture than if they had stormed into this courtroom, overrun to the Supreme Court Police, required the justices and other participants to flee for their safety,” Prelogar said.
“What happened on January 6 was very, very serious, and I’m not equating this with that,” Alito responded. “But we need to find out what are the outer reaches of this statute under your interpretation.”
Trump himself faces charges of violating the same law, as well as conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. They are among four charges he faces in his election interference case in Washington, separate from the hush money prosecution currently moving ahead in New York.
Tuesday’s hearing comes just a week ahead of the Supreme Court hearing Trump’s bid to toss out his election interference charges based on a claim of presidential immunity. Justice Clarence Thomas was present for the arguments after an unexplained absence on Monday.
Fischer and Trump both say that the obstruction law does not apply to their alleged conduct, meaning that the charges should be dropped. Fischer faces seven criminal charges, only one of which is the focus of the Supreme Court case. He also faces charges of assaulting a police officer and entering a restricted building, among others.
