This should get SCOTUS review.
A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on April 7 upheld the U.S. Department of Justice’s novel use of a felony evidence-tampering statute against Jan. 6 criminal-case defendants....
The case began over the Department of "Justice"'s criminal charges against dozens of J6 political prisoners. A district judge tossed the charges on the basis that the law being used by DoJ did not apply to the cases at hand. His ruling was appealed; a DC circuit panel of three favored DoJ.
... the majority said the law applies to any effort to obstruct an “official proceeding,” including the ceremonial tallying of Electoral College votes by the U.S. Congress....
...Nichols ruled that federal law under 18 § U.S.C. 1512(c) does not apply to the conduct of the defendants because the statute was intended by Congress to have a narrow, limited focus related to the destruction of documents. It’s part of a section of the U.S. Code titled “Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant.”
Appeals Judges Pan and Walker disagreed, adopting a sweeping interpretation that the law includes evidence tampering and “all acts that obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding or attempt to do so.”...
"Influencing" such as ....oh, I dunno...... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
Stuff like that?
Beyond that, the majority goes full-comedian with this line:
... She said the law does have “guardrails” because the obstruction “must be accompanied by ‘corrupt’ intent; and the behavior must target an ‘official proceeding.’”...
The weaseling begins and ends with 'corrupt intent'--a mens rea requirement which, if properly applied, would exculpt all the J6 political prisoners but which, ironically, would serve to indict all the FBI, DC cops, and Homeland "Security" toadies who were corruptly leading the charge on the Capitol to entrap the J6 demonstrators.
Pay attention to this case as it moves to SCOTUS.
In the meantime, make certain that you do not have "corrupt intent" when you show up at your School Board meeting and protest sexualization of your 6-year-old daughter.
Yes, that's where this is going.
More on the decision here. There are twists and turns in it.
No comments:
Post a Comment