The Supreme Court rejects charges of obstructing the January 6 riots

Federal prosecutors overstepped their authority by invoking the Obstruction of Justice Act to charge hundreds of rioters on Jan. 6, the Supreme Court said in an opinion that could impact the case against Donald Trump.

The judges ruled that obstruction charges must include evidence that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents.

More than 350 people have been charged with obstructing Congress’s work in certifying the 2020 presidential election.

The law used by prosecutors was passed in 2002, after the Enron scandal, to crack down on corporate abuses.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides criminal penalties for anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other thing,” and another provision covers anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding.”

Justice Department prosecutors argued for a broad interpretation of the law to include those who broke into the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in an attempt to keep Trump in the White House.

But in a 6-3 opinion that crossed the Supreme Court’s usual ideological lines, the court ruled that the law should be interpreted relatively narrowly and applied only to defendants who tampered with documents.

How will this decision impact Trump’s case?

The ruling delighted Donald Trump’s supporters.

While the court added another flaw to the former president’s special impeachment — and the Supreme Court could rule in a separate case, expected next week, that he is entitled to immunity for his actions — it is unclear whether the decision will stay one of the charges against him.

“I think there will be legal action with Trump,” said Aziz Huq, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School.

“But the charges against him include falsifying or altering ‘records, documents or things.’ So I think that probably doesn’t undermine those charges.”

Additionally, Special Counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump with additional crimes in connection with his attempts to overturn the 2020 result: conspiring to defraud the United States and conspiring against civil rights.

These charges will be filed regardless of the outcome of the obstruction of access case.

The special counsel faces an obvious deadline. If Trump wins the November election, he could remove Smith from office and end the federal lawsuit.

What about the other defendants from January 6?

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was one of a series of laws used against those who stormed the Capitol in January 2021.

About 25% of those charged in the Capitol riot were prosecuted under the law, and all faced additional charges, according to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

“This decision will have no impact on the vast majority of the more than 1,400 defendants charged with illegal conduct on January 6,” Garland said in a statement after the decision, also noting his disappointment with the ruling.

The case to the Supreme Court was brought by Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer who attended a Trump rally in Washington on January 6, 2021, and then briefly visited the Capitol.

The video shows him arguing with police before leaving the building.

Lower courts will now decide whether the obstruction charge can proceed. However, Mr Fischer will also face trial on a number of other charges, including disorderly conduct, breach of peace and assaulting, resisting or obstructing a police officer.

More than 1,400 people have been charged with offences related to the riots.

According to Justice Department data, more than 500 defendants have been charged with assaulting, resisting or obstructing officers, including more than 130 accused of using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to a police officer.

More than 1,300 people have been charged with entering or remaining in a restricted federal building or property. More than 100 of them were charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon.

With additional reporting by Kayla Epstein