Justices cast doubt on obstruction charges for Jan. 6 rioters
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court cast doubt Tuesday on the legality of obstruction charges lodged against some 300 rioters arrested for breaking into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The court’s conservatives questioned whether the 2002 Sarbanes-oxley Act, which was aimed at corporate accounting fraud, can be used more broadly to prosecute those who obstruct “any official proceeding,” including Congress’ 2021 certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch noted that the law made it a crime to destroy or conceal documents to impair an “official proceeding,” but they voiced doubt over extending that to any disruptions of a proceeding.
If someone “pulls a fire alarm” to delay a vote in Congress, is that a federal felony subject to 20 years in prison?” Gorsuch asked.
While the justices sounded divided, most of the conservatives suggested they were skeptical of upholding the obstruction charges.
Such a ruling would deal a blow to the Jan. 6 prosecutions, but it would not prevent punishing them for their actions.
More than 1,200 rioters were arrested for the Jan. 6 break-in at the Capitol.
Most were charged with assaulting the officers on duty or with disorderly and disruptive conduct. Some were also charged with carrying dangerous or deadly weapons.
A few hundred were also charged with seeking to obstruct an official proceeding.
One of those was Joseph Fischer, an off-duty Pennsylvania police officer, who said on social media he expected the attack on the Capitol “might get violent” but that it was needed “to send a message that we the people hold the real power.”
When Fischer was arrested, he was charged with six counts of assault and disruption as well as seventh charge of obstruction, a charge which could send him to prison for several years.
A federal judge rejected the obstruc
tion charge, but the U.S. Court of Appeals restored it in a 2-1 decision.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard an appeal from Fischer’s public defender contending the obstruction charge should be thrown out on the grounds that the law protects only documents and evidence, not the proceeding itself.
At issue is how to interpret two clauses in the law. It states it is a crime for someone 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; or otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.”
Solicitor Gen. Elizabeth Prelogar said the Jan. 6 rioters intended to obstruct Congress from tallying the electoral votes that were to certify victory in the 2020 election.
This was “obstructive conduct” and it is exactly what the words of the law say, she argued.
But the chief justice disagreed. The obstruction clause “doesn’t stand alone,” he said. It is controlled by the earlier reference to documents and records, he said.
Justice Samuel Alito, suggesting the government’s reading of the law is too broad, asked whether the charge could be applied to people who disrupted the day’s court session by shouting “Keep the Jan. 6 insurrectionists in jail” or “Free the Jan. 6 patriots.”
He hastened to add, “What happened on Jan. 6 was very, very serious and I’m not equating this with that.”
Most lower-court judges who have weighed in have allowed the charge to stand. Among them, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, wrote that “statutes often reach beyond the principal evil that animated them.”
But U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, another Trump appointee, dismissed the charge against Fischer and two other defendants, writing that prosecutors went too far. A divided panel of the federal appeals court in Washington reinstated the charge before the Supreme Court agreed to take up the case.
While it’s not important to the Supreme Court case, the two sides present starkly differing accounts of Fischer’s actions on Jan. 6. Fischer’s lawyers say he “was not part of the mob” that forced lawmakers to flee the House and Senate chambers, noting that he entered the Capitol after Congress had recessed. The weight of the crowd pushed Fischer into a line of police inside, they said in a court filing.
The Justice Department says Fischer can be heard on a video yelling “Charge!” before he pushed through a crowd and “crashed into the police line.” Prosecutors also cite text messages Fischer sent before Jan. 6 saying things might turn violent and social media posts after the riot in which he wrote, “we pushed police back about 25 feet.”
— The Associated Press contributed to this report.