Secret Assets Owners
  • Investing
  • World News
  • Politics
  • Stock
  • Editor’s Pick
Editor's PickInvesting

Fischer v. US: Court Clarifies Ban on Obstructing a Federal Proceeding

by June 28, 2024
June 28, 2024

Walter Olson

The Supreme Court today narrowed the effective scope of a provision of the Sarbanes‐​Oxley financial reform law under which prosecutors have charged January 6 rioters with obstructing a federal proceeding. It ruled that to be charged, defendants had to have obstructed the integrity or availability of documents, objects, or other things used in the proceeding, not simply impeded it in other ways.

Today’s reading will result in the narrowing of some charges against the January 6 defendants. In no way, however, should it be viewed as a license for lawlessness. In nearly all cases, especially the serious ones, the rioters face other charges not at issue here. And while the ruling may at least slightly narrow the permitted scope of the federal prosecution of former President Donald Trump over January 6, much of Trump’s alleged obstructive behavior may still be chargeable as relating to the integrity and availability of official documents and the like.

The merits were in relatively close balance. The majority, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, relied on venerable canons of construction under which context counts, taking note that the catchall provision occurred amid a list of financial falsification and obstruction of justice offenses. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in concurrence, reviewed the legislative history and concluded that Congress probably did not intend to criminalize a far broader swath of obstruction.

In dissent, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, championed the stand‐​alone plain meaning of the law’s relevant phrasing. It was a disturbingly broad and capacious plain meaning, to be sure, under which protesters who briefly “impede” some federal agency proceeding, or a sitting of the court itself, by shouting out of turn might be exposed to lengthy prison sentences.

When there is genuine uncertainty as to the meaning of a law, judges help safeguard liberty by applying a narrow reading to avoid criminalizing conduct not clearly marked out as such. That is what the court did today.

previous post
Trump rips Biden for not firing generals after botched Afghanistan withdrawal: ‘Incompetence’
next post
$1.2 Trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill Off to a Very Slow Start

You may also like

Porch Pirates and Jersey Values: Why Washington Should...

December 26, 2025

How Fiscal and Economic Crises Prompted Retirement Reforms...

December 26, 2025

The Declaration, the Constitution, and America’s 250th

December 24, 2025

DHS Doesn’t List CECOT Prison Deportees in Its...

December 23, 2025

Heritage Doesn’t Make Somebody an American

December 23, 2025

Schemel v. Marco Island Brief: Urging Limits on...

December 23, 2025

Singleton v. Hamm Brief: Federal Courthouses Should Hear...

December 23, 2025

SNAP Has an Eligibility Loophole. Congress Needs to...

December 23, 2025

The Trump Executive Order Is a Good Step...

December 22, 2025

Fiscal Policy Is Raising Costs for American Families

December 22, 2025
Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get Premium Articles For Free


Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

Recent Posts

  • 2025 shockers: The biggest moments that rocked the campaign trail

    December 27, 2025
  • Most shocking examples of Chinese espionage uncovered by the US this year: ‘Just the tip of the iceberg’

    December 27, 2025
  • Zelenskyy says Ukraine, ahead of Trump meeting, is ‘willing to do whatever it takes’ to end war with Russia

    December 27, 2025
  • Trump’s peace through strength in 2025: where wars stopped and rivals came to the table

    December 27, 2025
  • Zelenskyy says fresh Russian attack on Ukraine shows Putin’s ‘true attitude’ ahead of Trump meeting

    December 27, 2025
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 SecretAssetsOwners.com All Rights Reserved.


Back To Top
Secret Assets Owners
  • Investing
  • World News
  • Politics
  • Stock
  • Editor’s Pick