On Wednesday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that could overturn dozens of convictions against J6 political prisoners and lead to the dropping of charges against President Trump. There are hundreds more who have been charged with obstruction, but have not been sentenced yet and those charges would also disappear. The DOJ is trying to use Section 1512(c)(2) to incarcerate every Trump supporter in the country, but that section deals with tampering with a witness, or victim, or an informant.
In a brief order, the justices agreed to hear a case stemming from Jan. 6 defendant Joseph Fischer’s request to dismiss the charge against him that could carry a 20 year sentence. Recently Jamaal Bowman and a could of left wing agitators could have been charged with the same crime but weren’t. If the Supreme Court sets aside those verdicts, DOJ prosecutors should be convicted of either selective prosecution or malicious prosecution or even both.
Fischer’s petition notes:
“Hundreds of cases have been and will be affected by the scope of Section 1512(c)(2), including a case against the former President. In addition, the use of Section 1512(c)(2) outside evidence impairment crimes is an extraordinary and unprecedented extension of the statute’s reach.”
In a brief order, the justices agreed to hear a case stemming from Jan. 6 defendant Joseph Fischer’s request to dismiss a charge against him for obstructing an official proceeding. His case provides the Supreme Court an opportunity to rule on the scope of a statute, Section 1512(c)(2), which he argues has been used to charge hundreds of other defendants in an “unprecedented extension of the statute’s reach.”
VISIT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNELThe statute threatens to levy fines or up to 20 years in prison for anyone who “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding.” Jan. 6 defendants, including Fischer, have been charged under Section 1512(c)(2) for obstructing Congress’s certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.
Trump also faces the obstruction charge in his indictment for alleged efforts to interfere with the 2020 election.
Fischer argues that the government seeks to sever the statute “from its legislative, historical, and textual moorings.”
“The D.C. Circuit’s expansion of Section 1512(c)(2) beyond evidence impairment to protests at the seat of government thus conflicts with the interpretations of other courts of appeal limiting the scope of the same statute,” Fischer’s attorneys wrote in a court filing.
Two other defendants, Edward Lang and Garrett Miller, also earlier asked the Supreme Court to dismiss obstruction charges against them.
