Following a recent Supreme Court ruling that narrowed how the Justice Department can pursue obstruction charges against January 6 rioters, federal prosecutors have begun offering retooled plea deals or dropping the specific charge against members of the mob that attacked the US Capitol.
Prosecutors are adapting to the constraints imposed by the Supreme Court's decision, as evidenced by recent court filings. Approximately 259 defendants were facing the obstruction charge when the ruling was issued, including five alleged members of the Proud Boys organization.
In a recent court filing, prosecutors revealed that each defendant, including individuals like Arthur Jackman and the father-and-son duo of Kevin and Nate Tuck, has been offered a plea deal that excludes the obstruction charge. Should the defendants decline the deal, prosecutors intend to dismiss the charge and proceed to trial on other alleged crimes.
The Supreme Court's ruling in the Fischer v. United States case has led to the dismissal of the obstruction charge against some defendants, such as Mark Sahady and Gina Bisignano. Prosecutors cited the need for further evaluation in Bisignano's case and opted to drop the charge to maintain the current trial date.
While the ruling has provided relief for some rioters, the impact remains limited. Only a small fraction of Capitol riot defendants have been convicted solely of the obstruction charge and are serving prison time. The Justice Department reports that 130 individuals have been convicted and sentenced for obstructing an official proceeding, with many also convicted of additional felonies.
As the Justice Department reviews individual cases in light of the Fischer ruling, ongoing proceedings in the D.C. Circuit will play a crucial role in determining the government's approach to the obstruction charge moving forward.
