WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has begun hearing a case that could undo charges for those who stormed the Capitol in 2021.

It focuses on whether a 2002 federal law created to prevent corporate misconduct could apply to individuals involved in the 6 January riots.

More than 350 people have been charged in the incident under that law, which carries a 20-year prison penalty.

Donald Trump faces the same charge in the pending federal case accusing him of election interference.

The law makes it a crime to "corruptly" obstruct or impede an official proceeding.

On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justices heard two hours of arguments over the law's interpretation. However, it remained unclear how they would rule.

A lawyer for a man who stormed the Capitol and was prosecuted under the law argued before the Justices that "a host of felony and misdemeanor" crimes already exist to prosecute his client's actions.

The 2002 law passed in the wake of the Enron accounting scandal, Jeffrey Green said, was not one of them.

US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar counterargued that rioters deliberately attempted "to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the election," therefore obstructing an official proceeding.

Both fielded skeptical questions from the Justices.

At one point, Green argued that there is no historical precedent in which the law was used to prosecute demonstrators.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor replied: "We've never had a situation before where (there was an attempt) to stop a proceeding violently, so I am not sure what a lack of history proves."

On the other hand, Prelogar fielded questions from Justice Neil Gorusch on whether the law could then be stretched to apply to a "sit-in that disrupts a trial" or "a heckler" at the State of the Union Address.

"Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?" he asked, appearing to reference an incident in which Jamaal Bowman, Democrat House representative, pressed a fire alarm in the Capitol.

How the top court rules could have wide-ranging effects on the hundreds of people charged, convicted or sentenced under the law, as well as the prosecution of Trump.

How has it been used in response to the 6 January riots?

Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has brought obstruction charges against those who participated in the storming of the Capitol.

Federal prosecutors argue they did so to impede Congress' certification of the presidential electoral vote count to cement Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election.

Therefore, the latter portion of the law that deals with obstructing an "official proceeding" would apply, the DOJ says.

How could the Supreme Court ruling affect Trump?

The former president is charged under the very same law in a federal case accusing him of working to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Biden.

If Supreme Court justices rule that the law does not apply to the 6 January rioters, Trump could seek dismissal of half the charges he faces in that case.

It also could be seen as a political win for the former president, who is seeking re-election in November, as he repeatedly has accused prosecutors of overreach.

A final ruling is not expected until June. (Source: BBC News)

Story Date: April 17, 2024