WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Tuesday began investigating whether those involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol could be charged with obstruction of justice in connection with the election meddling prosecution of former President Donald Trump.
The judges are considering the appeal of the accused Joseph Fisherthe congressional confirmation of Joe Biden’s election victory, which was disrupted by a mob of Trump supporters, more specifically, a former police officer trying to dismiss an indictment accusing him of obstruction of justice.
The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has been skeptical of prosecutors in the past when they argued for the broad application of criminal provisions.
Trump himself is charged with violating the same law, as well as conspiracy to obstruct official proceedings. They are among four charges he faces in the Washington election meddling case, separate from the hush money chase now underway in New York.
Tuesday’s hearing comes just a week before the Supreme Court hears a bid to dismiss Trump’s election meddling charges based on his claim of presidential immunity. After the deliberations, Judge Clarence Thomas took part unexplained absence Monday.
Fischer and Trump say the statute of limitations does not apply to their alleged conduct, meaning the charges should be dismissed.
On January 6 prosecutors say, Fischer joined the mob from the east side that breached the Capitol. “Charge it!” “Mom—–s!” he shouted over and over again before pushing towards the police line. says the government.
Later, he and other rioters fell to the ground. After other rioters pulled him to his feet, a video released as evidence in other Jan. 6 trials shows him trying to appeal to the officers guarding the Capitol, saying he was one too.
Fisher faces seven felony charges, only one of which is the focus of the Supreme Court case. He is also charged with assaulting a police officer and entering a prohibited building, among others.
The said law makes it a crime to obstruct, influence or attempt to obstruct any official proceeding. The charge carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.
The provision was enacted in 2002 as part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was passed in the wake of the Enron accounting scandal.
Fisher’s attorneys say the law should be limited to cases involving the alteration of physical evidence, which they say is exactly what the law is intended to do.
A decision in Fisher’s favor could be in Trump’s favor, though that’s not guaranteed. Prosecutors in Trump’s case said that even if Fischer wins, Trump’s behavior will still be covered by a narrower interpretation of the statute.