The Department of Justice (DOJ) has dropped obstruction charges for nearly half of the pending cases against January 6 defendants following a significant Supreme Court decision.
According to The Daily Caller, the ruling in June prompted a reevaluation of charges related to obstructing an official proceeding.
The Supreme Court's decision in Fischer v. United States narrowed the interpretation of a statute that had been used to charge many January 6 defendants. This statute, which carries a potential 20-year prison sentence, penalizes those who corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding.
Following the court's ruling, the DOJ has dropped obstruction charges for approximately 60 out of 126 defendants with pending cases. The department continues to pursue charges against 13 defendants and is still assessing its approach for the remaining cases.
The impact of the ruling extends beyond pending cases. For 133 cases that had already been adjudicated when the Fischer ruling was issued, the DOJ has stated it does not oppose dismissal or vacatur of the obstruction charge in about 40 instances.
However, the department is still reviewing the remaining adjudicated cases to determine the appropriate course of action.
The Supreme Court's decision has set a new standard for prosecutors. To prove a violation of the obstruction statute, the government must now demonstrate that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity of records, documents, objects, or other items used in the proceeding.
Despite the dropped charges, the DOJ emphasized that no defendants were charged solely with violating the obstruction statute. A statement from the department clarified:
There are zero cases where a defendant was charged only for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512. In other words, even if the government foregoes this charge, every charged defendant will continue to face exposure to other criminal charges.
This clarification underscores that while some charges have been dropped, the legal proceedings against the January 6 defendants are far from over.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested that prosecutors might still be able to move forward with charges in certain circumstances. Specifically, she indicated that cases involving the impairment or attempted impairment of the availability or integrity of items used during the January 6 proceeding could potentially meet the new standard set by the court.
This guidance from Justice Jackson may provide a roadmap for prosecutors as they reassess their approach to these cases in light of the Supreme Court's ruling.
The DOJ's decision to drop nearly half of the pending obstruction charges against the January 6 defendants marks a significant shift in the legal landscape surrounding these cases. The Supreme Court's ruling has necessitated a reevaluation of the charges, impacting both pending and adjudicated cases.
While some charges have been dropped, defendants still face other criminal charges, and the DOJ continues to pursue prosecutions where appropriate under the new legal standard.
