Prosecution of attempts to overturn the 2020 U.S. presidential election
January 6 U.S. Capitol attack were among those more likely to be charged with obstructing an official proceeding, a
felony, unlike others who were charged only with
misdemeanors. As of December 2022, about 290 out of over 910 defendants associated with the
January 6 United States Capitol attack had been charged with obstructing an official proceeding, with over 70 convicted. It tended to be used with defendants who had entered the
Senate chamber or the offices of Congress members, or members of groups such as the
Oath Keepers,
Proud Boys, and
Three Percenters who were alleged to have prepared for violence in advance. Those who entered other areas of the Capitol were typically charged only with
misdemeanors such as entering a restricted federal building, or parading, demonstrating, or picketing in the Capitol. musician
Jon Schaffer,
Proud Boys member
Nicholas Ochs, and
Ronald Sandlin. Several members of militant groups have been convicted of the charge. On March 8, 2022, in the first criminal trial of a Capitol attack defendant, Three Percenters member
Guy Reffitt became the first to be convicted of obstructing an official proceeding, along with other charges. In November 2022,
Stewart Rhodes,
Kelly Meggs, and three other members of the Oath Keepers were convicted, and four additional Oath Keepers members including
Roberto Minuta were convicted in January 2023. In May 2023, Proud Boys members
Enrique Tarrio,
Ethan Nordean,
Joe Biggs, and Zachary Rehl were convicted. A number of other defendants have been convicted who are notable for various reasons.
Kevin Seefried, who was photographed brandishing a
Confederate flag and threatening police officer
Eugene Goodman, was convicted in 2022. In 2023,
Richard Barnett was convicted, who had been prominently photographed in Speaker
Nancy Pelosi's office during the attack, as was
Kevin James Lyons, who had stolen a wallet and photograph of
John Lewis from Pelosi's office.
Ryan Samsel, the first to breach the restricted perimeter outside the Capitol, was convicted in 2024.
West Virginia House of Delegates member
Derrick Evans was charged with obstructing an official proceeding, but the charge was dropped in a
plea deal in which he instead pleaded guilty to a felony civil disorder charge. In September 2022, Tristan Chandler and David Mehaffie became the first January 6 defendants to be acquitted of an obstructing an official proceeding charge, although they were convicted on other charges. In January 2024, Joshua Black became the first defendant who had entered the Senate chamber to be acquitted, although he too was convicted on other charges. Both acquittals were because prosecutors had not sufficiently proven their intent. On August 1, 2023, two counts in the four-count indictment
Donald Trump was charged with by a
grand jury following the
Smith special counsel investigation were for obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding for
his conduct following the 2020 presidential election through the January 6 Capitol attack.
Applicability dispute Some January 6 attack defendants argued that, given the circumstances of its passage, the law should apply only to proceedings involving the administration of justice where evidence is being presented, and not
the Electoral College vote count as an administrative and ceremonial event. Although two federal judges of the
District Court for the District of Columbia initially expressed concerns in court about the law's use,
Fischer v. United States However, on March 7,
Carl J. Nichols became the first federal judge to rule that the law was not applicable to the Capitol attack, on the basis that the word "otherwise" in the statute required that the conduct must involve "some action with respect to a document, record, or other object". At least two other district court judges subsequently criticized Nichols' reading of the statute in their own rulings. The hearing occurred on December 12, 2022. On April 8, 2023, the court issued its ruling. While it held that obstruction did not have to pertain to a document, it noted that the requirement of "corrupt intent" required prosecutors to differentiate defendants' conduct from protected protest or lobbying activities. The ruling permitted the three challenged cases to continue on the basis that, as they were also charged with assaulting police, there was no question that they had acted with corrupt intent. While the ruling reversed Nichols' rulings, it was seen as potentially opening an avenue for those not charged with assaulting police to overturn an obstruction charge. In December 2023, the
Supreme Court agreed to hear one of the three cases as
Fischer v. United States. In June 2024, it ruled in favor of Fischer that the charge only applied when "the defendant impaired the availability or integrity... of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so." This had the effect of setting a higher bar for conviction than had actually been used in trials to that point, and was expected to lead to dismissal of the charge or overturning of convictions in cases where this requirement had not been met.
Other appeals A different appeal to the D.C. circuit court,
Robertson v. United States, was heard in May 2023. That October, the court upheld Robertson's conviction. Another appeal,
United States v. Brock, ruled in March 2024 that a sentencing penalty for substantial interference with the administration of justice did not apply to the conduct during the January 6 attack. The ruling raised the possibility that more than 100 people already convicted would have to be resentenced. ==See also==