Can law passed responding to Enron scandal be used in Jan 6 prosecutions? Supreme Court to decide

WASHINGTON (Gray DC) - The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday over the harshest penalty the Department of Justice is bringing against January 6 defendants.

“This is their big bang charge,” said attorney Paloma Capanna, who filed a brief in the case. “This is the 20 year federal felony.”

Those advocating for the defendants argue the DOJ cherry-picked a statute from a law actually meant to deal with evidence tampering, passed in the wake of the 2001 Enron scandal.

They argue it was never meant to cover events like Jan 6, and believe enforcing the law that way could impact free speech.

“If you do not have a criminal background, if you do not have an ill intention, think about the impact,” Capanna said. “Will that chill you from even setting foot in Washington D.C. at all?”

Attorneys for the government argue the letter of the law is clear. Obstructing an official proceeding is a crime, and they believe that’s what happened during the riot at the Capitol.

“Did petitioner obstruct, influence or impede the joint session of Congress?” U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Barchas said. “The answer is equally straightforward. Yes, he obstructed that official proceeding.”

Adding to the cases high profile, Donald Trump is facing the same charge the defendant is asking the high court to dismiss.

“The decision by the Supreme Court in the Fischer case could result in two of the four counts being dismissed against the former president, so that makes it very important,” Georgia State University law professor Clark Cunningham said.

The court is expected to hand down its ruling in late June.

Copyright 2024 Gray DC. All rights reserved.