Justices Gorsuch and Alito Highlight Biden Admin's Glaring Double Standard during J6 Hearing

Matt Margolis : Apr 17, 2024
PJ Media

No matter what example justices offered, including pro-Palestinian protesters blocking traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge on Monday, or the hypothetical of protesters blocking traffic from Virginia to Washington, DC, the Biden administration's position [was] that none of these would meet the same requirement.

[PJMedia.com] On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot. The court's ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump. (Screengrab image: via C-SPAN)

Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government's case, which US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making. Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch posed a question that was epic, to put it mildly.

Specifically, he inquired whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), who infamously pulled a fire alarm to delay a House vote, could face charges under the same statute.

"What does that mean for the breadth of this statute?" Gorsuch asked. "Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler at today's audience qualify, or a heckler at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?"

...

Picking up where Gorsuch left off, Justice Samuel Alito gave more examples that Prelogar argued would be difficult for the government to prove obstruction of an official proceeding... Subscribe for free to Breaking Christian News here

Read this article in its entirety, and listen to the audio clip Here.