Supreme Court Decision Could Demolish Jack Smith's Case Against Trump

Today the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether January 6 protestors at the U.S. Capitol can be charged with obstructing an official proceeding. The pending ruling could greatly impact Special Counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case against President Donald Trump because the former President faces the same charge. Will the Justices wreck Smith’s case against Trump?

Fox News provides more insights into today’s oral arguments at the Supreme Court:

It is the “sleeper” case that could upend the most closely watched criminal prosecution in the nation. And how the U.S. Supreme Court decides the fate of an obscure Capitol riot defendant will have immediate legal and political implications for the former and perhaps future president.

The justices on Tuesday will hold oral arguments in the appeal of Joseph Fischer, one of more than 300 people charged by the Justice Department with “obstruction of an official proceeding” in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in Washington.

That charge refers to the disruption of Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Donald Trump.

Joseph Fischer, one of the protestors arrested for entering the U.S. Capitol in 2021, was charged with seven counts. He is challenging one of the counts as unconstitutional – “obstruction of an official proceeding” under 18 U.S. Code Section 1512(c)(2). Today’s debate revolves around whether this provision specifically pertains to "tampering with evidence." In essence, Fischer argues that he did not violate this law because he did not tamper with evidence in relation to an official proceeding.

This issue is significant as two of the four charges against President Trump (“obstruction of an official proceeding” and “conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding”) fall under this category. If the Justices throw out the two strongest charges, then Smith only has two very generic charges left against Trump. The two remaining charges would be “conspiracy to defraud the United States” and “conspiracy against rights.”

But how exactly did Trump conspire to defraud the country, and whose rights did Trump conspire against? The Supreme Court and federal courts usually don’t like generic charges.

Since this case has reached the level of the U.S. Supreme Court, one can reasonably ascertain that at least four of the Justices believe the Court of Appeals was wrong and overbroad in their interpretation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1512(c)(2). All this to say, the ramifications of the Justices’ decision could be huge for Trump’s case.

Today’s other pressing news focused on Israel, as NBC News reported that Israel’s retaliatory response to Iran’s drone attack could be “imminent.” Yesterday, we told you how President Biden outrageously told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu just to “take the win” since Israel was able to shoot down most of Iran’s drones. However, it’s not Biden’s job to dictate how Israel is allowed to defend its people.

Israel has no choice but to respond in some fashion to Iran’s historic attack. Israel can’t live and flourish this way, especially considering the murderous October 7 attack last year. It is typically a large tourism destination and major economic power, yet it’s hard to think of Israel that way right now.

Danny Danon, a Member of the Knesset and the former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. and the U.N., joined the broadcast to discuss Israel’s response:

We shouldn’t accept the idea of calling it a day and move on. We’re going to retaliate. We don’t want to start a full war with Iran, but we will have to send them a very clear and painful message. Don’t mess with us. Don’t mess with Israel. Don’t mess with the IDF, and if you think that we are weak because we are busy now fighting Hamas and Hezbollah, you are mistaken. In the same way we showed our defense capabilities, we will be able to demonstrate also our offensive capabilities.

Based on the report that Turkey and the U.S. were aware of Iran’s plans to attack Israel, it appears that Iran knew the world would take its side. It’s sickening to see countries and international tribunals continuing to excuse the actions of Iran and Hamas and portray Israel as the villain.

The ACLJ is actively advocating on Israel’s behalf. Today we delivered a vital demand letter to U.N. Secretary-General Guterres, demanding that the U.N. condemn Iran for its attack and recognize that Israel has a right to defend itself. Advocate for Israel with us by signing our new petition.

Today’s Sekulow broadcast included a full analysis of the possible fallout in Trump’s Jan. 6 case based on the Justices’ pending decision. Chris Mitchell of CBN News joined us from Jerusalem to update us on Israel’s anticipated response to Iran. ACLJ Senior Advisor for National Security and Foreign Policy Ric Grenell commented on House Republicans voting for stricter sanctions on Iran.