Carlos Velazquez

Great SCOTUS decision. This was anticipated by conservative legal scholars who believe in strict interpretation of the Constitution and the law. The law was strictly applied by SCOTUS whose ruling cancelled the "expanded" DOJ interpretation. Not surprisingly statist Amy Barrett voted with the liberals while, very surprisingly, liberal judge Ketanji voted with the conservatives. The ones already convicted under the now invalidated interpretation should appeal.

"The Supreme Court's decision could affect the ongoing prosecutions of nearly 250 defendants charged with obstruction for their participation in the Jan. 6 assault. It could also upend cases that have already been adjudicated, since those who were convicted of violating the obstruction statute or pleaded guilty could seek resentencing, withdraw their pleas or ask for new trials. There are 52 cases in which a defendant was convicted and sentenced on charges where the obstruction count was the sole felony, and of those, 27 are currently incarcerated, according to the Justice Department."

Supreme Court limits scope of obstruction charge levied against Jan. 6 defendants, including Trump
cbsnews.com

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 2 kb.