TenderLovingKiller®
Well-Known Member
It’s a technicality in how the law was written, it was written in response to the whole Enron fiasco. The majority doesn’t feel that the law can be applied in the way that it was because it was not specifically written in that way. The dissenting opinion by Comey-Barrett said that though it’s was not written to specifically address the action of January 6th it’s written broadly enough that a prosecutor should be able to apply it to these cases.I don’t want to read any of these decisions, can someone summarize for me how the Jan 6 rioters weren’t guilty of Obstruction?
Also, the decision doesn’t mean that rioters are off Scott-free the case was sent back to the lower court where prosecutors can proceed with other charges.
They also implied this obstruction of justice charge could still be hung on Trump since he would still fit the more narrow definition.