Special Counsel Jack Smith hinted that he might ignore the Supreme Court if it overturns the obstruction statute this summer.
The US Supreme Court has just revealed that it will hear oral arguments in Fischer v. United States and at issue is statute 18 USC §1512(c)(2):
Whoever corruptly—
(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or
(2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Fischer v. United States, expected this summer, could potentially overturn numerous J6 cases.
The Department of Justice under Biden has brought charges against over 300 individuals involved in the January 6th events under 18 USC §1512(c)(2). Furthermore, two out of the four charges against Trump in Jack Smith’s DC case involve conspiracy to obstruct, so the Supreme Court’s decision could potentially undermine the special counsel’s case against Trump too.
Jack Smith hinted that he’ll seek an alternative solution if the Supreme Court overturns two of the charges against Trump.
Smith asserts that the “obstruction” charges will remain valid against Trump, arguing that the alternative electoral certificates constitute “documents” fraudulently utilized in an “official proceeding.”
These documents weren’t even dispatched or signed by Trump!
According to an excerpt from The Federalist:
A decision in Fischer’s favor would seemingly negate the two 1512(c)-related charges against Trump and “upend hundreds of charges filed by federal prosecutors against those present at the Jan. 6 Capitol riot,” according to Justice.
In an apparent attempt to sidestep such a ruling, however, Smith argued in his Monday brief that even if SCOTUS deems the DOJ’s use of 1512(c)(2) unlawful, the related charges filed against Trump should still stand because Trump somehow impaired evidence for use in an official proceeding.
“Petitioner asserts … that the grant of review in Fischer v. United States … suggests that the Section 1512(c)(2) charges here impermissibly stretch the statute. But whether the Court interprets Section 1512(c)(2) consistently with a natural reading of its text or adopts the evidence-impairment gloss urged by the petitioner in Fischer, the Section 1512 charges in this case are valid,” Smith wrote, additionally claiming that “the use of falsehoods or creation of ‘false’ documents satisfies an evidence-impairment interpretation.”
Jack Smith isn’t the only one considering bypassing the Supreme Court.
Last month, DC US Attorney Matthew Graves issued a stern warning to the US Supreme Court – and J6ers serving time for 18 USC §1512(c)(2), the ‘obstruction’ statute pending before SCOTUS.
Share your thoughts by scrolling down to leave a comment.
