WASHINGTON — The United States Supreme Court on Friday limited the scope of a law used against supporters of former Republican President Donald Trump who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, by nullifying a charge against one of them.
This decision could have indirect consequences for the federal trial against former President Trump, who Democrats accuse of allegedly trying to alter the result of the 2020 election won by Joe Biden, since this charge is one of the ones against him.
Trump’s trial is on hold pending a Supreme Court ruling – expected on Monday – on the criminal immunity he claims as a former president.
Friday’s ruling centers on whether the charge of obstructing an official proceeding applies to the assault on the Capitol, meaning the attempt to prevent Congress from validating the election results.
The court, by a majority of six votes to three, considers that it cannot be applied to former police officer Joseph Fischer for what he did on January 6, 2021.
To prove the law was violated in this case, the prosecution must “establish that the defendant compromised the availability or integrity of records, documents, or objects intended for use in an official proceeding,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.
The high court, in this opinion, places the burden of proof on the Government and considers that the federal authorities must demonstrate that the accused had the intention to “destroy or alter the integrity of files, documents or any other object used in official procedures.” “.
There are currently 250 defendants accused of obstruction in the Capitol assault, plus another 52 where the defendant in question was convicted of this crime alone, and of this number, 27 are currently in jail, according to the Department of Justice, whose head was appointed by President Joe Biden.
The discrepancies
On the contrary, conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett and two progressive colleagues disagree.
Amy Coney Barrett believes that these are “semantic contortions” to give the law a more restrictive interpretation than what she believes Congress intended.
Attorney General Merrick Garland, who is accused of applying justice in Biden’s favor, deplored in a statement this decision, which “limits an important federal law” used by his services to hold accountable the main perpetrators of the “unprecedented attack” against the institutional system on January 6, 2021.
But “it will only have consequences in a small number of cases,” according to the department, which specifies that of the more than 1,400 people charged for their participation in the assault on the Capitol, less than 18% were prosecuted or found guilty of this charge.
Of those who were convicted, about 50 were convicted on this charge alone and 27 are currently serving prison sentences, according to the same source.
Source: With information from AFP and Europa Press
