Explorer

US Supreme Court Toughens Criteria For Charging Capitol Riot Defendants With Obstruction, Trump Calls It 'Massive Victory'

The US Supreme Court narrowly ruled that the obstruction statute used in Capitol riot prosecutions requires proof of document tampering, making it harder to charge defendants.

The United States Supreme Court made it more difficult to charge Capitol riot defendants with obstruction on Friday, a charge used in numerous prosecutions, including against former president Donald Trump. The justices ruled 6-3 that the charge of obstructing an official proceeding, which was enacted in 2002 following the Enron scandal, requires proof that defendants attempted to tamper with or destroy documents. Only some individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack fit this criterion.

This decision may bolster claims by Trump and his Republican allies that the Justice Department has been unfair to Capitol riot defendants, news agency AP reported. It's unclear how this ruling will impact the case of Trump in Washington, although special counsel Jack Smith has indicated that the charges against Trump would not be affected.

As per a report by AP, the high court sent the case of former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph Fischer back to a lower court to decide if he could be charged with obstruction. The police officer was indicted for his role in disrupting Congress' certification of Joe Biden's 2020 US presidential election victory over Trump. He is one of about 350 people charged with obstruction, some of whom pleaded guilty to or were convicted of lesser charges.

ALSO READ | Biden & Trump Clash In Historic Debate As Abortion Rights, Stormy Daniels Scandal, And More Take Center Stage

Chief Justice John Roberts authored the court’s opinion, joined by conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas, as well as liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. Roberts argued that a broad interpretation of the obstruction statute would criminalise a wide range of activities, potentially exposing activists and lobbyists to lengthy prison sentences, AP reported.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented. Barrett, one of Trump's appointees, asserted that the law clearly covers the events of January 6, noting that the riot forced Congress to delay proceedings for several hours.

View More
Advertisement
Advertisement
25°C
New Delhi
Rain: 100mm
Humidity: 97%
Wind: WNW 47km/h
See Today's Weather
powered by
Accu Weather
Advertisement

Top Headlines

Rs 21 Crore In 5 Years Not Enough To Maintain Haryana Ministers' Bungalows, More Funds Approved For 'Repairs'
Rs 21 Crore In 5 Years Not Enough To Maintain Haryana Ministers' Bungalows, More Funds Approved For 'Repairs'
Border-Gavaskar Trophy 2024-25: Star Opener Dismissed For Duck; Australia On Top In 1st Test | WATCH
BGT 2024-25: Star Opener Dismissed For Duck; Australia On Top In 1st Test | WATCH
Delhi Weather: Fog Likely To Continue Over National Capital As IMD Forecasts More Winter Chill
Delhi Weather: Fog Likely To Continue Over National Capital As IMD Forecasts More Winter Chill
India Not Expansionist, Doesn't Usurp Resources: PM Modi In Guyana
India Not Expansionist, Doesn't Usurp Resources: PM Modi In Guyana
Advertisement
ABP Premium

Videos

India Emerges as G20's Growth Leader, Check Out the Latest GDP Rankings | ABP NewsAirtel-Nokia Partnership: Nokia’s Spectacular Comeback, Shakes Up the Telecom Sector | ABP NewsAdani Group in Turmoil: Bribery Scandal Rocks Shares, Plunge by 20% | ABP NewsPLI Scheme: Transforming India's Manufacturing Sector into a Global Powerhouse

Photo Gallery

Embed widget