Supreme Court hears obstruction law arguments that could impact Trump, Jan. 6 rioters cases

41,402
0
Published 2024-04-16
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared divided over a federal obstruction statute used to prosecute hundreds of people who breached the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021. CBS News' Scott MacFarlane breaks down the impact of the case.

#news #politics #supremecourt

CBS News Streaming Network is the premier 24/7 anchored streaming news service from CBS News and Stations, available free to everyone with access to the Internet. The CBS News Streaming Network is your destination for breaking news, live events and original reporting locally, nationally and around the globe. Launched in November 2014 as CBSN, the CBS News Streaming Network is available live in 91 countries and on 30 digital platforms and apps, as well as on CBSNews.com and Paramount+.

Subscribe to the CBS News YouTube channel: youtube.com/cbsnews
Watch CBS News: cbsnews.com/live/
Download the CBS News app: cbsnews.com/mobile/
Follow CBS News on Instagram: instagram.com/cbsnews/
Like CBS News on Facebook: facebook.com/cbsnews
Follow CBS News on Twitter: twitter.com/cbsnews
Subscribe to our newsletters: cbsnews.com/newsletters/
Try Paramount+ free: paramountplus.com/?ftag=PPM-05-10aeh8h

For video licensing inquiries, contact: [email protected]

All Comments (21)
  • Where is Ray Epps??? WE HAVE TO GO INTO THE CAPITAL INSIDE. I HAVE PEOPLE TO GET US INTO THE CAPITOL.
  • Unreliable; liable to be erroneous or misleading, undependable, fallible, likely to be full of error, not worthy of trust.
  • I saw protesters in the capital the other day. Protesters had red hands and protesting Israel. No one was arrested.
  • @khbow2810
    This whole thing is nothing but a load of crap.
  • @StreetSinner
    How broad is it? To specify is to exclude. If it doesn't specifically exclude violent incursion of the building in which the official proceeding takes place, thus halting the proceeding, then yes, obstruction occurred and it applies. It's not some tricky legal question; the answer is obvious and provided by the statute in question by the fact that it is broadly stated and does not specifically exclude things that would be ridiculous to exclude. If anyone wants to change that, there's a process for introducing a bill in Congress, but it's not up to SCOTUS to just delete laws to protect their little buddies.
  • @petegww
    The title should read SUPREME COURT SMACKS DOWN ROGUE DOJ OFFICIALS
  • Tell the family members of the 5 that died that this was a Peaceful Protest & not an Insurrection...
  • I'd like the federal government to STOP spending money not in the bank, TODAY!!!
  • @BuddaFett
    only insurrection recorded in history where no one wielded weapons. Almost as if it wasnt an insurrection.
  • The right to protest an official proceeding is fundamental to the first amendment.
  • @oldmanghost219
    What was the original intent of the law. That counts for a lot.
  • @chrisper7527
    There are no nuances in obstruction. Police officers use the term liberally to bring charges in many cases, even to individuals minimally involved in official police proceedings.
  • @GeeTrieste
    fyi, for some reason few of these videos actually mention the SCOTUS case name: Fischer v. United States
  • @khatdubell
    I don't think he knows what an inflection point is.
  • @walter857
    There were no guns or knives. What a load of liars.