On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot.
The court's ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump.
Advertisement Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making.
Specifically, he inquired whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman, who infamously pulled a fire alarm to delay a House vote, could face charges under the same statute.
"Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler at today's audience qualify, or a heckler at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?" "There are multiple elements of the statute that may not be satisfied by those hypotheticals," insisted Prelogar.
It's not surprising that the Biden administration's position was that pulling a fire alarm to delay a House vote wouldn't be prosecuted under the same statute because it chose not to prosecute Bowman.
I love the way that Gorsuch used Bowman as an example, yet the conservative wing of the court continued to own Prelogar.
No comments:
Post a Comment