Federal prosecutors have initiated the process of dropping obstruction charges against certain Jan. 6 rioters following a Supreme Court decision that limits the scope of these charges. The ruling emerged from the case Fischer v. United States, which questioned the application of the obstruction charge, traditionally used against tampering with records, to the actions of the Capitol rioters.
The Supreme Court's decision, delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, indicated that prosecutors must prove that defendants specifically intended to impair the integrity or availability of documents or records used in an official proceeding.
Jan 6th Video Everyone In Power Pretends Doesn’t Exist
ON CAMERA Undercover Police Officer States “… We go undercover as ANTIFA in the crowd…” on January 6….
Media Silent. Both Parties Silent. Intelligence Agencies Silent. No Indictments. No Nothing, Just Pure Treason. #J6 pic.twitter.com/5r3OGklPZl
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) August 14, 2023
This interpretation narrows the law's application significantly, affecting many cases brought against participants in the January 6 Capitol breach.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in a dissent joined by two liberal justices, criticized the majority for performing “textual backflips” to narrow the federal statute's scope. However, the majority held firm, requiring a direct connection between the defendant's actions and the impairment of official records or proceedings.
Remember: the Secret Service DELETED their Jan 6 texts and comms. With zero repercussions, investigation or outrage. Why?pic.twitter.com/82jXIFl8bG
— Erich Hartmann (@erichhartmann) July 15, 2024
This ruling has profound implications for the Department of Justice (DOJ). More than 355 out of 1,424 defendants faced obstruction charges.
Now, many of these charges may be re-evaluated, reduced, or dismissed entirely. For instance, defendants like Jorge Aaron Riley and Sean Michael McHugh, who received significant prison sentences, could see their cases revisited or their sentences altered in light of this new legal interpretation.
The Fischer case itself began when a district court dismissed obstruction charges against three defendants, including former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph W. Fischer. A subsequent appeals court ruling reinstated the charges, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has now sent the case back to the lower courts to determine whether the defendants can be prosecuted under the new, narrower interpretation of the law.
Federal prosecutors have started adjusting their approach, offering revised plea deals and, in some cases, dropping the obstruction charge entirely. This move reflects a significant shift in the legal landscape for the prosecution of Jan. 6 defendants and could lead to widespread changes in how these cases are handled moving forward.
