The Supreme Court threw out a Department of Justice’s charge against a Pennsylvania man who entered the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 with other protestors who were objecting to the certification of the 2020 presidential election.
In a court vote of 6-3 on Fischer v. United States, the majority agreed with former policeman Joseph Fischer that he was wrongfully charged: A crime the government charged him with was written for cases involving evidence tampering and destruction of records. Fischer did no such thing when he entered the building with other protesters. The statute in question, Section 1512(c)(2), was being improperly applied after the federal government expanded the meaning of the statute to weaponize it against Jan. 6 defendants.
The ruling could mean more than 300 other Jan. 6 defendants could see at least this one charge dropped, although others may still be pending. Fischer was originally charged with seven crimes relating to the unruliness at the Capitol.
U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland released a statement downplaying the importance of the ruling: “January 6 was an unprecedented attack on the cornerstone of our system of government — the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next. I am disappointed by today’s decision, which limits an important federal statute that the Department has sought to use to ensure that those most responsible for that attack face appropriate consequences.”
Merrick said the “vast majority of the more than 1,400 defendants charged for their illegal actions on January 6 will not be affected by this decision. There are no cases in which the Department charged a January 6 defendant only with the offense at issue in Fischer. For the cases affected by today’s decision, the Department will take appropriate steps to comply with the Court’s ruling.”
On Friday, a fact sheet from the Department of Justice went further in defending itself:
“Today’s decision will most significantly impact a narrow band of cases: those where the only felony for which a defendant was convicted and sentenced was 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). In total, approximately 52 individuals have been convicted and sentenced on that charge and no other felony; of those individuals, only 27 are currently serving a sentence of incarceration—less than 2 percent of all charged cases arising from the Capitol Breach,” the Department of Justice said in an attempt to spin the decision and absolve itself of wrongfully prosecuting Americans.
The Department also explained the impact of the decision on pending cases: “Of the approximately 249 remaining cases, there are zero cases where a defendant was charged only with 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). In other words, in every case potentially impacted by the Fischer decision, the defendant faced other criminal charges—felonies, misdemeanors, or both—for illegal conduct related to the Capitol Breach.”
Dissenting with the majority opinion was conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Agreeing with the opinion was leftist Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
The case was remanded back to the D.C. Circuit Court, where the charges against Fischer may still proceed for obstructing a proceeding of Congress.
More than 750 J-6ers have already been sentenced for J-6 crimes. Nearly two-thirds of those convicted received some prison time, from a few days of intermittent jail time to 22 years — the sentence given to Proud Boys member Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, 39, of Miami.
In the 41 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 1,450 individuals have been charged in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the entry into the Capitol while the Senate was certifying the election. At least 500 of those are charged with felony assault of or impeding law enforcement, the Justice Department said. Jan. 6 is the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history, with the judgments coming from the D.C. District Court, where seven of the 11 judges are Democrat appointees. The Justice Department is still hunting for about 80 individuals to press charges, including the person or persons who placed bombs at the headquarters of the Republican and Democrat parties in D.C.
The SCOTUS opinion can be read at this link.
Read this Reason Magazine analysis of the decision.
