206

The Supreme Court will weigh in on the January 6 insurrection. What could possibly go wrong? (www.vox.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Court’s decision could potentially undermine over 300 January 6 prosecutions, including Trump’s.

According to the Justice Department, Joseph Fischer texted his boss before the January 6 insurrection to tell him that he might need to post bail. The accused insurrectionist also allegedly warned that the protest at the US Capitol “might get violent,” and he allegedly wrote that “they should storm the capital and drag all the democrates [sic] into the street and have a mob trial.”

When the day of the insurrection came, Fischer allegedly yelled “Charge!” before running and crashing into a line of police inside the Capitol. The Justice Department says that video footage “shows at least one police officer on the ground after [Fischer’s] assault.” Fischer was only in the Capitol for four minutes, according to the DOJ, before he was “forcibly removed.”

Fischer was arrested after the FBI identified him based on a video he posted on Facebook that showed him inside the Capitol on January 6.

More than three years later, however, Fischer has yet to be tried. The criminal proceeding against him has been tied up in appeals after a Trump-appointed trial judge ruled that one of the criminal laws Fischer is charged with violating must be read very narrowly. That ruling is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court, in a case called Fischer v. United States.

The Supreme Court will hear this case next month.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

The corrupt trump judge's reading of the statute in focus here is such overly-obvious bullshit. Also, not even his reading I'm sure (did someone follow the paper trail that shows how the federalist society likely fed him his "thoughts" on this to pave the path to the conflict of interest laden Supreme Court?

This is serious, but none of it is sincere. 250 years to fully confront the fact that the US founding principles of government are built on "gentlemen's agreements" and an assumption of minimum level of real/performative integrity (and a fear of tarnished legacy after death) - our way of government is helpless if those core assumptions aren't in place. Now we're just left here to watch an obvious slow moving train intentionally crushing line after line of school children and ultimately headed towards a cliff.

Plenty of warning time, but nobody can move the children or stop the train.

this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024

206 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19144 readers

5296 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News