US Supreme Court ruling makes it more difficult to prosecute Trump and Capitol stormers

The Supreme Court on Friday recused prosecutors in the files surrounding the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. They ruled that prosecutors went too far in their use of an obstruction law in those cases.

The law in question was passed in 2002 in response to the financial scandal that brought down the energy company Enron. But according to the judges, that law is not applicable to many in this scenario. According to them, the obstruction law was only intended to apply in more limited circumstances. For example, there must be evidence of tampering with evidence. The judges therefore ruled, by a vote of 6 to 3, that such a charge of obstruction must include evidence that defendants attempted to tamper with or destroy documents. The broad range of situations for which the prosecutors now tried to use the law is therefore not included.

Former police officer

The Supreme Court’s decision stems from the conviction of Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer who participated in the so-called “Stop the Steal” rally on the morning of Jan. 6 before storming and entering the Capitol.

Fischer was one of about 350 people charged by federal prosecutors under the law in question, which says anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes an official proceeding, or attempts to do so” could be fined or punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Fischer challenged his conviction, ultimately bringing his case to the Supreme Court.

27 suspects in jail

The Supreme Court’s ruling means only some who violently invaded the Capitol in 2021 will be included in that charge. According to NBC News, of the more than 1,400 cases involving the storming of the Capitol, 247 are affected by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Although there are only 52 cases in which that obstruction charge was the only charge. And only 27 of those suspects are currently serving a sentence.

Importantly, the Supreme Court also made clear that rioters can still be charged under the obstruction law if prosecutors can prove that the suspects not only attempted to enter the building, but also attempted to prevent the arrival of specific certificates. These certificates are used to count votes and thus determine the election results.

Donald Trump

Former President Donald Trump must also answer in court for the facts that happened on January 6. He is being prosecuted for his efforts to nullify the 2020 presidential election. Trump faces four charges in that case, two of which relate to obstruction of official proceedings.

But according to analysts in the American media, the new Supreme Court ruling does not mean that the obstruction charge against Trump should be dropped. Analysts say prosecutors still have strong arguments they can use to uphold the obstruction charge. Namely that Trump was involved in a conspiracy to thwart the certification of the votes by Congress by having counterfeit ballots introduced from “fake” electors.