By John Kruzel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Shares of Donald Trump and his supporters after his defeat in the 2020 election will be at the top of the U.S. Supreme Court’s agenda over the next two weeks in cases involving his attempt to avoid prosecution for trying to overturn his defeat and the attempt by a man charged in the Capitol attack to escape a charge brought by Trump. also faces.
Both cases take on even greater significance as Trump campaigns to return to the White House as a Republican candidate challenging Democrats. President Joe Biden during the American elections on November 5.
The justices will hear arguments Tuesday in an appeal from Joseph Fischer, who was indicted on seven counts following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots, including corruptly obstructing an official proceeding – certification by Congress of Biden’s victory over Trump. They next hear arguments April 25 on Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity from prosecution.
“The court has yet to directly address issues related to January 6,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law. “But Fischer and Trump very clearly raise the issues arising from January 6.”
Trump has taken numerous steps to try to overturn his 2020 defeat. His false claims of widespread election fraud helped fuel the attack on the Capitol as Congress met to certify Biden’s victory. Trump and his allies also hatched a plan to use fake electors from key states to thwart certification.
Federal prosecutors have brought obstruction charges against about 350 of the roughly 1,400 people charged in the Capitol attack, including Fischer and Trump. Experts say a Supreme Court ruling dismissing the charges against Fischer could make it more complicated — but not impossible — to pursue charges against Trump. The charge carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, although defendants convicted of obstruction on Jan. 6 received much lesser sentences.
It is one of four criminal cases against Trump, whose first trial opens Monday in New York on charges involving hush money paid to a porn star. Trump has pleaded not guilty in all cases and called them politically motivated.
On March 4, the Supreme Court overturned a decision by Colorado’s highest court to exclude Trump from the state’s ballot under a constitutional provision involving insurrection. But the justices did not address the lower court’s finding that Trump created “an atmosphere of political violence” before the Jan. 6 attack and “engaged in an insurrection.”
IMMUNITY CLAIM
Before Trump, no former president had faced criminal charges.
Trump claimed he had “absolute immunity” because he was president when he took the actions that triggered Smith’s indictment for election subversion. Smith urged the Supreme Court to reject this assertion on the principle that “no one is above the law.”
In August 2023, Smith brought four federal counts against Trump in the election subversion case: conspiracy to defraud the United States, corruptly obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to do so, and conspiracy to Americans’ right to vote.
Fischer is awaiting trial on six charges, including assaulting or obstructing police officers and civil disorder, while he contests his obstruction charge in the Supreme Court.
According to prosecutors, Fischer blamed police officers guarding an entrance to the Capitol during the attack. Fischer, at the time a member of the North Cornwall Township Police Department in Pennsylvania, entered and leaned against an officer’s riot shield as police attempted to clear the rioters. He remained in the building for four minutes before police removed him.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, dismissed Fischer’s obstruction charge, finding it only applied to defendants who tampered with evidence. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed that decision, ruling that the law broadly covers “all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding.”
A Supreme Court ruling favoring Fischer could mean hundreds of other defendants facing the same charges could seek resentencing, withdraw their guilty pleas or seek a new trial.
“This may not make much difference in most cases, because if the defendants were convicted on multiple counts, the judge might decide not to modify the sentence even if the obstruction charge has gone,” said Randall Eliason, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at George Washington University Law School.
About two-thirds of the Jan. 6 defendants charged with obstruction were also charged with other crimes.
Eliason said a Fischer victory might not deter Smith from pursuing obstruction charges against Trump, despite the higher bar the Supreme Court could set.
“The charges against Trump will likely survive because Smith will be able to argue that his case involved evidence-based obstruction, based on lists of fake voters,” Eliason said.
Legal experts have said the Supreme Court would need to rule by around June 1 for Trump’s trial on election-related charges to conclude before November 5. If Trump regains the presidency, he could seek to force an end to the prosecutions or possibly obtain a pardon. himself of any federal crime. Trump pledged to pardon the January 6 defendants.
(Reporting by John Kruzel; editing by Will Dunham and Scott Malone)
yahoo
