Supreme Court gives skeptical eye to key statute used to prosecute Jan. 6 rioters

People walk by as supporters of Jan. 6 defendants gather outside of the Supreme Court on Tuesday.The U.S. Supreme Court appeared divided on Tuesday, with conservatives expressing various degrees of skepticism about the statute used to prosecute more than 350 people involved with the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol.

Jackson said that trying to prevent the electoral count seemed to her like an obstruction of an official proceeding. And Sotomayor said that if this statute doesn't seem to be an exact match for the Jan. 6 attack, that is because there had never been an event like this one before. Justice Neil Gorsuch asked whether"a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler in today's audience qualify or at the State of the Union address?"Justice Samuel Alito followed up, posing this question:"Let's say that today while you're arguing, five people get up, and they shout either, 'Keep the Jan. 6 insurrectionists in jail,' or 'Free the Jan. 6 patriots.

"We have focused on things like preparation for violence, bringing tactical gear or paramilitary equipment to the Capitol," she said. Still, Chief Justice John Roberts remained doubtful, also probing whether the Justice Department has similarly applied this statute in other cases. Prelogar replied that there is a key difference between statutes that do not require an intent to obstruct and this one, which

"Because those counts don't fully reflect the culpability of petitioner's conduct on Jan. 6," answered Prelogar. Fisher"had said in advance of Jan. 6 that he was prepared to storm the Capitol, prepared to use violence. He wanted to intimidate Congress. He said, 'They can't vote if they can't breathe.' And then he went to the Capitol on Jan. 6 with that intent in mind and took action, including assaulting a law enforcement officer.

United States Latest News, United States Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Supreme Court gives skeptical eye to key statute used to prosecute Jan. 6 riotersConservatives on the court expressed varying degrees of skepticism about the charge of obstructing an official proceeding.
Source: NPR - 🏆 96. / 63 Read more »

The Supreme Court Just Gave Texas a Green Light to Harass Every Latino Person in the StateThe 5th Circuit went rogue, and the Supreme Court’s conservatives let it.
Source: Slate - 🏆 716. / 51 Read more »

Ketanji Brown Jackson ‘concerned’ First Amendment is ‘hamstringing’ government from censorshipThe Democratic Supreme Court justice was harshly criticized by conservatives for her argument.
Source: dcexaminer - 🏆 6. / 94 Read more »

Opinion: Conservatives game the system to drag Supreme Court further into culture warSteve Vladeck writes that right-wing litigants have regularly taken advantage of their ability to handpick ideologically sympathetic judges by filing a disproportionate percentage of lawsuits challenging the Biden administration in geographically remote district courts within the Fifth...
Source: cnni - 🏆 326. / 59 Read more »

Jan. 6 Defendants Warned Supreme Court Plea Could BackfireA U.S. attorney has issued a warning to Jan. 6 defendants hoping the Supreme Court will throw out a charge used in hundreds of cases.
Source: Newsweek - 🏆 468. / 52 Read more »

Jan. 6 Defendant Accuses Lawyer of 'Lying' to Supreme CourtConservatives have raised concern about an assertion made by the DOJ during arguments in Fischer v. United States.
Source: Newsweek - 🏆 468. / 52 Read more »