Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The U.S. Supreme Court docket has set a convention for Dec. 1 on whether or not to simply accept two key Jan. 6 case appeals—one involving a federal agent who carried his firearm on the U.S. Capitol and the opposite on the Division of Justice’s controversial use of evidence-tampering regulation to prosecute Jan. 6 defendants for felony obstruction of Congress.
If both or each of the petitions are accepted, it will likely be the primary time a Jan. 6-related case is reviewed by the Supreme Court docket.
On Nov. 14, the courtroom listed each instances as “distributed for convention” on Dec. 1.
Protection legal professional Marina Medvin, who’s concerned in each instances, mentioned it ought to be clear by Dec. 4 if the courtroom will problem orders, settle for or reject the petitions for evaluate, or maintain the instances over for an additional convention.
The primary case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—may impression a whole bunch of defendants accused of essentially the most ceaselessly charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official continuing, which carries a possible 20-year jail time period, has been charged in 317 instances, in keeping with the latest DOJ tally.
Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted below the regulation, which has by no means been utilized in such a method because it was applied in 2002 as a way to curb company monetary fraud.
Attorneys for Mr. Lang and three different Jan. 6 defendants who filed an amici curiae temporary within the case say the DOJ’s weaponization of the statute represents harmful prosecutorial overreach.
“If the Biden DOJ’s adventurism is allowed to face, it is going to completely change the power of the federal government to suppress the rights of Americans,” authorized researcher Jonathon Moseley told The Epoch Occasions in October.
“Each American will probably be on the whim of any prosecutor to terrorize them.”
The DOJ mentioned the Excessive Court docket mustn’t intervene, permitting the prosecutions to proceed.
“At a minimal, the federal government ought to be permitted to current its case to a jury and show that petitioners obstructed a continuing by [in part] stopping the related decision-makers from viewing the proof on the time and place specified for that objective,” reads the DOJ’s opposition document.
Stopping the joint session of Congress from tallying the Electoral School votes from the 2020 presidential election “constitutes evidence-focused obstruction,” the DOJ wrote, likening what protesters did on the Capitol to locking up proof from the election in a vault the place it could not be accessed.
DEA Agent’s Handgun
The second case entails the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.
Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal costs: getting into and remaining in a restricted constructing or grounds with a lethal or harmful weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and accidents to property for climbing on a statue on the fringe of Capitol grounds.
Mr. Ibrahim comes from a navy and law-enforcement household. Earlier than becoming a member of the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Military intelligence. His brother is an Military veteran who turned an FBI particular agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mom was on the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
Mr. Ibrahim’s attraction argues that although he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally approved by federal regulation to hold his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA laws encourage brokers to hold their weapons and credentials always, the appeals petition says.
“The prosecution of this case breaks religion with numerous federal regulation enforcement officers who make themselves accessible across the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per company directives,” the doc states.
“Failure to deal with the query of the regulation’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the general public and the regulation enforcement officers within the software of the legal guidelines.”
United States District Choose Timothy Kelly in March dominated in opposition to Ms. Medvin’s movement to dismiss Rely 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim below 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.
Learn extra here…
Loading…
