The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday in a case that could have far-reaching implications for former President Donald J. Trump and the hundreds of rioters involved in the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021. The case revolves around whether a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act covers the conduct of a former police officer, Joseph W. Fischer, who participated in the assault.
The law in question, enacted in 2002 in response to accounting fraud and document destruction, is at the center of two federal charges against Mr. Trump in his election subversion case, as well as the prosecutions of over 350 individuals involved in storming the Capitol. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Mr. Fischer, it could potentially impact the charges against Mr. Trump and others involved in the attack.
The key issue in the case is the interpretation of the law’s provision that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding. Prosecutors argue that this provision is a broad catchall that applies to various forms of conduct, while Mr. Fischer’s lawyers contend that it should be limited to obstruction linked to the destruction of evidence.
The case also raises questions about the meaning of the term “corruptly” in the law, with judges in the appeals court unable to agree on a definition. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for how the law is applied in cases involving obstruction of official proceedings.
This case is just one of several involving Mr. Trump on the Supreme Court’s docket, with another case to be argued next week concerning his claim of total immunity from prosecution. The decision in this case could have a significant impact on the legal challenges facing Mr. Trump and others involved in the Capitol attack.
