Supreme Court Tosses Obstruction Charges for January 6 Protesters

The United States Supreme Court ruled on June 28 that the Department of Justice (doj) used an inappropriately broad interpretation of a federal statute to prosecute a January 6 protester. Supreme Court justices delivered a 6-3 decision in Fischer v. United States, ruling that Joseph Fischer should not have been charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding.”

Fischer attended the Stop the Steal rally in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021, and entered the Capitol building around 3:25 p.m., after Congress had already gone into recess. He was later charged with “obstruction of an official proceeding” in violation of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was passed in response to the Enron scandal.

The Supreme Court majority opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts clarifies that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act only applies to tampering with physical evidence used in an official proceeding. Therefore, Fischer isn’t guilty of anything more than trespassing.

The 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been used by the doj to charge more than 300 January 6 protesters with felonies punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The new Supreme Court ruling applies to them all.

Special Counsel Jack Smith also charged Donald Trump with obstructing an official proceeding on Jan. 6, 2021, so this Supreme Court decision could also impact this case.

Political persecution: The Stop the Steal rally was supposed to draw attention to the issue of election fraud, while 100 congressional representatives presented enough evidence of such fraud to convince Vice President Michael Pence to block the certification of the election. But violence at the Capitol stopped this plan from unfolding.

Now radical leftists are trying to discourage further investigation into the serious issue of election fraud by prosecuting protesters. The Supreme Court is revealing how many prosecutors are twisting the law.

King’s court: An amazing prophecy in Amos 7:13 describes a king’s chapel and a king’s court that support an end-time type of King Jeroboam ii. Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has explained that Donald Trump is the end-time Jeroboam ii. In January 2019 he showed that “the king’s chapel” is “a place of worship that belongs to the king,” and “the king’s court” (better translated “the kingdom’s court”) is a “nonreligious entity … referring to the United States Supreme Court.”

The Supreme Court lacked the courage to stop election theft, government tyranny and other issues in 2020. But it has begun pushing back against the radical left’s attempts to prosecute those investigating election fraud.

Keep watching for the Supreme Court to expose such fraud in a way that benefits Donald Trump’s campaign.

Learn more: Read “Is America’s Supreme Court in Bible Prophecy?”