A groundbreaking Supreme Court ruling on Friday could lead to reduced sentences for individuals currently in prison or facing charges related to the January 6, 2021 Stop the Steal protests at the Capitol, including President Trump.
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has overturned the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) use of 1512(c)(2), a statute concerning obstruction of an official proceeding, in cases related to the events of January 6, 2021.
This ruling represents a major victory for January 6 political prisoners and a devastating blow to the crooked Biden DOJ.
In a massive victory for J6 political prisoners and an unprecedented defeat for the corrupt Biden/Garland/Monaco/Graves DOJ, SCOTUS has overturned the DOJ’s use of 1512(c)(2), obstruction of an official proceeding, in J6 cases.
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) June 28, 2024
THIS MEANS THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HAS UNLAWFULLY…
The decision reveals that Biden’s DOJ illegally prosecuted over 350 individuals for their participation in January 6 — an inappropriate application of the law used to penalize those who protested the stolen 2020 presidential election and to suppress political dissent.
The DOJ and U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves are prosecuting President Trump on four counts related to protesting the 2020 presidential election. Two of these charges involve violating 18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2) and (k) for conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding. Without these two clear counts, Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump could falter due to the vagueness of the other two charges.
In a split 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court found that the DOJ abused its power in charging hundreds of protestors with obstruction of official congressional proceedings on the day Congress met to certify the results of the stolen 2020 election. For over three years, defendants and their attorneys have argued that the federal statutes used against them were too ambiguous, describing criminal acts that required tampering with documents or resources, not just unlawfully entering the Capitol building. However, the six-member majority noted that obstruction crimes could be applied to protestors if they were found guilty of physically interfering with the delivery of the states’ Electoral College certifications to the House floor that day, CNN reported.
Nick Sorter reported:
🚨 #BREAKING: SUPREME COURT RULES MANY J6 PROSECUTIONS WERE ILLEGAL
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) June 28, 2024
This is a HUGE WIN for the January 6th prisoners! 🔥
Many will be set free, and hundreds of charges will be dropped.
In its 5-4 decision, the court decided the DOJ abused its power and overused “obstruction”… pic.twitter.com/hzATNJ2GaP
More from CNN:
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the Justice Department overstepped by charging hundreds of people who rioted at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, with obstruction in a decision that could force prosecutors to reopen some of those cases.
At the same time, the high court ruled that the charge could be filed against the rioters if prosecutors are able to demonstrate they were attempting not just to push their way into the building but rather to stop the arrival of certificates used to count electoral votes and certify the results of the election.
The high court’s decision means that special counsel Jack Smith is likely to continue to pursue the same charge against former President Donald Trump.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for a 6-3 majority that included mostly conservatives and one liberal, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justice Amy Coney Barrett filed a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
Roberts barely mentioned the attack on the US Capitol that precipitated the charges, focusing heavily on a detailed discussion of the text of the law. Roberts noted that the breach “of the Capitol caused members of Congress to evacuate the chambers and delayed the certification process.”
Roberts argued that if Congress intended for prosecutors to be able to tack 20-year prison sentences onto the kind of conduct witnessed on January 6, 2021, lawmakers would have said so.
“Nothing in the text or statutory history suggests that (the law) is designed to impose up to 20 years’ imprisonment on essentially all defendants who commit obstruction of justice in any way and who might be subject to lesser penalties under more specific obstruction statutes,” Roberts wrote.
Special counsel Jack Smith has alleged Trump’s obstruction of the congressional proceeding is much more sweeping than the rioters’ actions, dating back to a scheme that began on Election Day and involved the use of bogus electoral certificates sent in from states around the country.
Still, Trump’s legal team is likely to attempt to use Friday’s Supreme Court opinion to challenge parts of the case, if and when it returns to the trial-level judge.
The opinion was authored by Chief Justice Roberts, with Justice Coney Barrett dissenting, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. Justice Jackson, a Democrat who joined the majority opinion, also penned a concurring opinion. She emphasized that despite “the shocking circumstances involved in this case,” the Court’s responsibility is “Court’s task is to determine what conduct is proscribed by the criminal statute that has been invoked as the basis for the obstruction charge at issue here.”
One of the most stunning SCOTUS opinions of my lifetime because of how it was aligned. Wow. https://t.co/YEbQCV5zh3
— Steve Deace (@SteveDeaceShow) June 28, 2024
