More than 350 defendants in the January 6, 2021 uprising at the U.S. Capitol in Washington have been charged under a federal statute that prohibits interfering with an official proceeding.
Or does it ?
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in the case Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer charged for allegedly participating in the January 6 insurrection. Fischer challenged the charge, saying it doesn't apply in the case.
The law in question -- known as Section 1512(c)(2) -- says whoever "corruptly alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so" could face 20 years in prison.
It's that "otherwise" part that is being challenged.
Fischers's attorney argued it only applies to actions that affect the integrity of witnesses or evidence. The U.S. Department of Justice says it applies to the intentional disruption of Congressional duties, such as the certification of a presidential election, and that evidence such as text messages before January 6 showed Fischer went to the rally with just such intent.
Fischer's lawyer countered that, strictly reading the statute, if intentionally "influencing" Congress is a crime, then there aren't enough prisons to hold all the lobbyists.
The court appeared split Tuesday, with conservatives skeptical of the government's arguments and the liberals more supportive. But we'll have wait for the final ruling.
What makes the case even more interesting is that former President Donald Trump also faces the same charge in his upcoming federal trial in Washington over his alleged role in the January 6 incident. If the court sides with Fischer, it could weaken Special Counsel Jack Smith's case against Trump.
Stay tuned.