The Supreme Court appeared incredibly skeptical of how a law has been used to charge hundreds of participants in the attack on Jan. 6, 2021, in arguments on Tuesday.
During arguments, the court’s conservative justices appeared hostile to the use of this provision in the context of Jan. 6, suggesting that the government’s interpretation of the provision was overly broad. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also seemed to question whether the government’s theory about how to apply this provision could criminalize other activity, like protests and disturbances, that were not as violent or disruptive as the insurrection.
The court’s conservative justices appeared to favor this reading of the statute, although they spent much of their time discussing hypothetical applications of the law. Jackson also addressed the fear of an overly broad use of the statute, saying that she was “struggling with leaping from” the document focus of 1512 to the broad interpretation by the government of 1512 encompassing “all obstruction in any form.”
A narrower ruling following Jackson and Barrett’s lead could preserve a possible pathway for the government to continue some prosecutions, so long as it can prove intent to impede the certificates. A broader ruling, as the other conservatives seemed to be looking for, would likely lead to the dismissal of hundreds of charges brought against insurrectionists — including Trump.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: HuffPostCanada - 🏆 61. / 53 Read more »
Source: GlobalCalgary - 🏆 50. / 61 Read more »
Source: YahooFinanceCA - 🏆 47. / 63 Read more »
Source: CBCCalgary - 🏆 78. / 51 Read more »
Source: CBCNews - 🏆 2. / 99 Read more »
Source: PGCitizen - 🏆 65. / 51 Read more »