Supreme Court Hears Case of Jan. 6 Rioter

 

As we noted yesterday (the bad), the Republican-dominated Supreme Court will hear arguments from Trumpists that the felony obstruction of an official proceeding charges on January 6 are inappropriate and should be dropped. The decision, not expected until June, would have a damaging effect on the Trump Thugs that stormed the Capitol, battling cops, breaking doors and windows and nearly getting into the House chamber to stop the ceremonial electoral vote count. From Politico:

"The case turns squarely on the actions pro-Trump rioters took that day — including ransacking the Capitol and bludgeoning police officers — and whether the felony obstruction charge the Justice Department has deployed against many of them is being used appropriately.

The high court’s ultimate ruling — expected by the end of June — could overturn hundreds of Jan. 6 felony convictions and hamper numerous pending prosecutions. A ruling against the Justice Department could even ripple into special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump, whom he charged with two charges of obstructing Congress’ business that day.

Until this week, the justices had not dealt publicly in any depth with the violence of Jan. 6 or who can be held legally responsible for it. The justices barely mentioned the riot when they heard arguments in February on efforts in some states to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot for stoking the Jan. 6 insurrection or when they resolved that legal fight in Trump’s favor." (our emphasis)

We count at least two firm votes with Trump -- the extremist Alito and corrupt Thomas -- and likely the three right-wing justices that the Malignant Loser appointed. A district court judge overseeing several January 6 trials, the Trump-appointed Carl Nichols, has already dismissed the obstruction charges in several of his trials. The Supreme Court case was brought by a MAGAt rioter, who wants his obstruction charge dropped, too:

"The current case, however, Fischer v. United States, was actually brought by a Jan. 6 defendant, Joseph Fischer, who says that 20-year old obstruction statute — passed in the wake of the Enron financial scandal — was not intended to cover the type of conduct that rioters engaged in on Jan. 6. Rather, Fischer argues, it was supposed to be limited to classic cases of evidence-tampering, like forging or shredding documents.

Federal prosecutors reject that claim, saying the text of the law itself was written broadly to cover any attempts to interfere with an 'official proceeding' — such as the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress intended to certify the results of the 2020 election — so long as they can prove a defendant acted with a 'corrupt intent.' About 350 rioters have been tagged with the charge, which carries a 20-year maximum sentence." (our emphasis)

After being exhorted by the Malignant Loser to "fight like hell" before sending them to the Capitol, his violent cultists knew exactly what they were going to do: stop the count, obstruct the proceeding to allow time for fake electors to be submitted, and grab VP Pence if possible. It's as simple as that, but with today's Supreme Court, when their cult leader's shock troops are involved, there's nothing predictable.