Supreme Court Ruling Jeopardizes Hundreds of January 6 Cases
In a significant decision, the Supreme Court has ruled that obstruction charges must include evidence of an attempt to tamper with or destroy documents. This ruling casts uncertainty over more than 350 cases related to the January 6 Capitol riot, where individuals were charged with obstructing the certification of the 2020 presidential election.
Background on the Law
The charges in question were based on a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a law enacted in 2002 following the Enron scandal to combat corporate fraud. This law imposes criminal penalties on anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object,” and also on anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding.”
Prosecutors had advocated for a broad interpretation of this law to include those who participated in the January 6 attack on the Capitol, aiming to disrupt the certification process. However, in a 6-3 decision that crossed usual ideological lines, the Supreme Court ruled for a narrower application, limiting it to cases involving document tampering.
Implications for Trump's Case
The ruling has been welcomed by supporters of former President Donald Trump. Although it introduces a new challenge for the special prosecutor handling Trump’s case, it is not clear if it will affect one of the charges against him. Aziz Huq, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, noted that while the decision might lead to further litigation, the charges against Trump involving the falsification or alteration of records are likely to stand.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has also charged Trump with other serious crimes related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, including conspiring to defraud the U.S. and conspiring against the rights of citizens. These charges are expected to proceed regardless of the outcome of the obstruction charge. However, if Trump wins the upcoming presidential election, he could potentially dismiss Smith and end the federal legal proceedings against him.
Impact on Other January 6 Defendants
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was one of several laws used against individuals who stormed the Capitol on January 6. About 25% of the defendants were prosecuted under this statute. Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, Attorney General Merrick Garland assured that the majority of the over 1,400 individuals charged for their actions on that day will not be affected. Garland expressed disappointment with the decision but emphasized that most defendants face additional charges.
The case that prompted the Supreme Court’s ruling involved Joseph Fischer, a former police officer from Pennsylvania, who was present at Trump’s rally and briefly entered the Capitol. Fischer was caught on video arguing with police officers. Lower courts will now decide if the obstruction charge against him can proceed. Fischer also faces several other charges, including civil disorder, disorderly conduct, and assaulting a police officer.
The January 6 Capitol Riot
The events of January 6 continue to have a profound impact on American society. Over 1,400 individuals have been charged with various crimes related to the riot. Justice Department data shows that more than 500 defendants face charges of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers, with over 130 charged with using dangerous weapons or causing serious injury. Additionally, more than 1,300 people have been charged with unlawfully entering or remaining in restricted federal buildings or grounds, with over 100 of them carrying dangerous or deadly weapons.
The Supreme Court’s decision introduces new complexities into the ongoing legal processes stemming from the Capitol riot, potentially altering the course of many cases and influencing future interpretations of obstruction laws.
