Supreme Court Case Could End Biden DOJ’s Jan 6 Witch Hunt
Apr 4, 2024 16:57:54 GMT -5
Post by schwartzie on Apr 4, 2024 16:57:54 GMT -5
Supreme Court Case Could End Biden DOJ’s Jan 6 Witch Hunt
Nick R. Hamilton
A case heading for the U.S. Supreme Court could finally put an end to Democrat President Joe Biden’s Jan. 6 witch hunt.
The Supreme Court will soon take up the appeal of a man convicted over Jan. 6.
The case could upend the witch hunt by Biden’s Justice Department against President Donald Trump and his supporters.
In Fischer v. United States, the court is being asked to weigh in on the scope of a federal obstruction statute.
The statute has been used to charge hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants and Trump himself.
The case is the latest sign of hope for many Jan. 6 defendants whom Trump has labeled “hostages” of a tyrannical regime.
In a separate January 6 case this month, an appeals court ruled that some defendants convicted for obstruction of an official proceeding had their sentences improperly enhanced.
Until January 6, 2021, no political protester had ever been charged with obstruction of an official proceeding.
This charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years.
The district judge in Fischer, Carl Nichols, ruled that the obstruction statute – which became law after the Enron scandal – was meant to be used for conduct like destroying evidence.
The appeals court reversed 2-1, even as Biden judge Florence Pan acknowledged the DOJ’s use of the obstruction statute against the Jan. 6 defendants was without precedent.
Two Trump judges on the panel, Justin Walker and Gregory Katsas, expressed concern that applying the law too broadly would criminalize lawful protest.
So far, the D.C. courts have neglected to rule on how the key term “corruptly” should be understood in the statute.
How the Supreme Court settles the question could have major implications for Trump – who is accused of a criminal “coup” – and the First Amendment more broadly.
Many of the alleged “insurrectionists” charged with obstructing Congress were non-violent protesters who have been compared to tourists.
The obstruction statute is also the basis of half of Jack Smith’s sweeping criminal case against Trump for “election interference.”
That case is already facing significant delays as the Supreme Court grapples with Trump’s immunity defense.
Many anticipate that Trump’s appeal will push the case past the 2024 election.
The Supreme Court shut down an effort to remove Trump from the ballot in a 9-0 decision this month that skirted a direct examination of the “insurrection” itself.
The court will hear oral arguments in Fischer on April 16.
link
Nick R. Hamilton
A case heading for the U.S. Supreme Court could finally put an end to Democrat President Joe Biden’s Jan. 6 witch hunt.
The Supreme Court will soon take up the appeal of a man convicted over Jan. 6.
The case could upend the witch hunt by Biden’s Justice Department against President Donald Trump and his supporters.
In Fischer v. United States, the court is being asked to weigh in on the scope of a federal obstruction statute.
The statute has been used to charge hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants and Trump himself.
The case is the latest sign of hope for many Jan. 6 defendants whom Trump has labeled “hostages” of a tyrannical regime.
In a separate January 6 case this month, an appeals court ruled that some defendants convicted for obstruction of an official proceeding had their sentences improperly enhanced.
Until January 6, 2021, no political protester had ever been charged with obstruction of an official proceeding.
This charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years.
The district judge in Fischer, Carl Nichols, ruled that the obstruction statute – which became law after the Enron scandal – was meant to be used for conduct like destroying evidence.
The appeals court reversed 2-1, even as Biden judge Florence Pan acknowledged the DOJ’s use of the obstruction statute against the Jan. 6 defendants was without precedent.
Two Trump judges on the panel, Justin Walker and Gregory Katsas, expressed concern that applying the law too broadly would criminalize lawful protest.
So far, the D.C. courts have neglected to rule on how the key term “corruptly” should be understood in the statute.
How the Supreme Court settles the question could have major implications for Trump – who is accused of a criminal “coup” – and the First Amendment more broadly.
Many of the alleged “insurrectionists” charged with obstructing Congress were non-violent protesters who have been compared to tourists.
The obstruction statute is also the basis of half of Jack Smith’s sweeping criminal case against Trump for “election interference.”
That case is already facing significant delays as the Supreme Court grapples with Trump’s immunity defense.
Many anticipate that Trump’s appeal will push the case past the 2024 election.
The Supreme Court shut down an effort to remove Trump from the ballot in a 9-0 decision this month that skirted a direct examination of the “insurrection” itself.
The court will hear oral arguments in Fischer on April 16.
link
