Supreme Court Questions January 6 Charges
The United States Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in an appeal by Joseph Fischer, a January 6 protester jailed under charges of obstructing an official proceeding.
The court seemed skeptical that the 2021 protest warranted up to 20 years in prison.
The argument: On Jan. 6, 2021, protesters trespassed and damaged the U.S. Capitol Building in connection to questioning the results of the 2020 presidential election.
The Biden administration worked to maximize punishments for this, looking for a law to hit its political opponents with massive penalties. It found the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a set of financial regulations introduced after the Enron scandal. One provision, designed to stop big businesses from thwarting attempts to audit them, imposed a penalty of up to 20 years in prison for “obstructing” an “official proceeding.”
Skepticism: During yesterday’s Supreme Court session, several conservative judges pointed to the danger of repurposing this law against the January 6 protesters.
- Should Democratic Rep. Jamaal Bowman face 20 years for pulling a fire alarm before a congressional vote?
- What about protesters blocking a bridge if someone stuck in traffic was heading to a courtroom?
Corruption: The Justice Department is clearly applying its new interpretation of the law exclusively against political opponents. The protest on Jan. 6, 2021, was a trap to get Congress to give up investigating election fraud and an excuse to go after Trump supporters.
It seems the Supreme Court may stop the Justice Department in this case, unraveling at least one part of this trap.
Main takeaway: The Bible prophesies of the legal corruption in America today. But it also indicates the Supreme Court will play a vital role in purging some of that corruption.
Learn more: Read “Is America’s Supreme Court in Bible Prophecy?”
