Supreme Court ruling makes it harder to charge Capitol riot defendants with obstruction

Supreme Court Makes it Harder to Charge Capitol Riot Defendants with Obstruction

In a decision that could have wide-reaching implications, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the charge of obstructing an official proceeding must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents. This ruling may impact the cases of Capitol riot defendants, including former President Donald Trump, who have been charged with obstruction.

The ruling has sparked debate and could be used to support claims by Trump and his Republican allies that the Justice Department has been unfair in its treatment of Capitol riot defendants. However, special counsel Jack Smith has stated that the charges against Trump will not be affected by the decision.

The case of former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph Fischer was sent back to a lower court to determine if he can be charged with obstruction. Fischer is among approximately 350 people who have been charged with obstruction in connection with the Capitol riot. Some defendants have pleaded guilty to or been convicted of lesser charges.

The decision could impact the sentencing of roughly 170 Capitol insurrection defendants who have been convicted of obstructing or conspiring to obstruct the joint session of Congress on January 6, 2021. Some defendants have already been released from prison while awaiting the Supreme Court’s ruling.

While most lower court judges have upheld the charge of obstruction, there have been differing opinions among the judiciary. The ruling may affect around 50 individuals who were convicted solely of obstruction, as they may be the most likely to see a change in their sentencing.

Overall, the ruling by the Supreme Court has raised questions about the fairness of the Capitol riot prosecutions and may have implications for future cases involving obstruction charges.