The U.S. Supreme court has decided to hear a case that will investigate if Capitol Riot defendants involved in the 6th of January Capitol Riot can be charged with ‘obstructing an official proceeding’ if their actions do not concern an investigation or evidence.
The case under review – Fischer v. United States – will determine if the federal indictment against Joseph Fischer, a Capitol Riot defendant, supports a charge under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), which the prosecutors say bans ‘corrupt’ obstruction, affecting or impeding an official proceeding.
Prosecutors alleged that Fischer, a previously serving police officer who entered the U.S. Capitol Building with a crowd of rioters and assaulted police officers, obstructed the certification process of the electoral college results of the 2020 presidential election. Despite these allegations, Fischer is contesting that the government’s interpretation is overly broad and that § 1512(c)(2) must be read in conjunction with the prior subsection, § 1512(c)(1), which prohibits the tampering of a document or record to obstruct an official proceeding.
U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols, a Trump appointee, initially dismissed the charge of obstructing an official proceeding against Fischer, co-defendants Edward Lang and Garret Miller. This decision was overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, who reinstated the charges in a 2-1 ruling, stating that § 1512(c)(2) ‘applies to all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding’ despite the term ‘otherwise’ at the beginning of the subsection.
There are over 1000 defendants who have been charged in relation to the Capitol Riot, and more than 310 have been charged with obstructing an official proceeding. Given the high profile nature of this case, any decision by the Supreme Court could have significant legal implications.