January 6th defendants win major Supreme Court victory over DOJ

Happy Friday Citizens

From MxM News

January 6th defendants win major Supreme Court victory over DOJ

MXM Exclusive

Quick Hit:

In a historic ruling, the Supreme Court has overturned the Department of Justice's use of a provision of the United States Code, which addresses obstruction of an official proceeding, in prosecuting participants of the January 6th Capitol riot, marking a major victory for January 6th defendants and a substantial defeat for the DOJ.

Key Details:

• The Supreme Court ruled, 6-3, that 18 U.S.C. §1512(c)(2) applies only to actions that impair the integrity or availability of evidence in an official proceeding, limiting its scope and overturning its use in January 6th prosecutions.

• This ruling means the DOJ has unlawfully prosecuted over 350 Americans on felony charges for their participation in January 6th, using a misapplied statute to criminalize political dissent and protest against Biden's election.

• The decision is viewed as a massive victory for January 6th political prisoners and a rebuke to the Biden administration's DOJ, highlighting a flagrant abuse of the law.

Diving Deeper:

In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court has significantly curtailed the Department of Justice's ability to prosecute participants in the January 6 Capitol riot under 18 U.S.C. §1512(c)(2). The case, Fischer v. United States (No. 23-5572), arose from the prosecution of Joseph Fischer, who was charged with obstructing an official proceeding by participating in the Capitol breach. Fischer argued that the obstruction statute only criminalizes actions related to evidence tampering.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act's provision, §1512(c), consists of two subsections. Subsection (c)(1) specifically targets actions like altering, destroying, or concealing records to impair their use in an official proceeding. Subsection (c)(2) extends to those who "otherwise obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding." Fischer contended that the "otherwise" clause should be interpreted narrowly, in line with the specific acts listed in (c)(1).

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision authored by Chief Justice Roberts, agreed with Fischer, stating that the "otherwise" clause in subsection (c)(2) must be read in context with the specific acts enumerated in subsection (c)(1). The Court applied interpretive principles, concluding that a broad reading of (c)(2) would render the specific examples in (c)(1) redundant. Therefore, the scope of (c)(2) is limited to actions involving the impairment of evidence.

Justice Jackson, concurring, emphasized that the legislative history supports this narrower interpretation. She noted that Congress aimed to close loopholes related to evidence tampering, not to create a broad obstruction statute.

In her dissent, Justice Barrett, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, argued that the broad language of (c)(2) was intended to cover various forms of obstructive conduct, including the actions of January 6 participants.

Julie Kelly, a prominent commentator, tweeted: "In a massive victory for J6 political prisoners and an unprecedented defeat for the corrupt Biden/Garland/Monaco/Graves DOJ, SCOTUS has overturned the DOJ's use of 1512(c)(2), obstruction of an official proceeding, in J6 cases."

This ruling implies that the DOJ has unlawfully prosecuted over 350 Americans using a misapplied statute, representing a flagrant abuse of the law to punish those who protested Biden's election and to criminalize political dissent. The decision is a major victory for January 6th defendants, highlighting the need for lawful and fair application of justice in politically charged cases.

________________________________________________________

MxM News delivers curated news that cut through the censorship, mainstream bias, and institutional dominance that has left society divided and misinformed. The platform allows readers to access the news that matters, particularly when it is being ignored. Updated minute-by-minute with news coverage from a diversity of publications and topics, readers have a one stop to be informed and stay informed.

Our name refers to 'minute by minute', and the app updates minute-by-minute with news coverage from a diversity of publications and topics.

The app is free to download and use and includes a paid subscription for access to exclusive content.

_____________________________________________________

Appreciate this? Donate for a coffee…no strings!