Special counsel Jack Smith urges Supreme Court to reject Trump's presidential immunity claim
NBCMar 28
The Facts
The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is considering whether federal prosecutors can charge Jan. 6 rioters under a law that prohibits manipulating a "record, document, or other object" so it can't be used in a government proceeding, or anyone who interferes with a official proceeding.
During oral arguments — which pitted US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar against Jeffrey Green, an attorney for Jan. 6 defendant Joseph Fischer — liberal and conservative justices seemed skeptical of the government's interpretation of the law.
The Spin
Pro-Trump narrative
The government's argument began to fall apart the second Prelogar faced questions from the justices. While she claims the obstruction statute applies to Jan. 6 protesters, she then admitted that it wouldn't apply to a myriad of similar protest scenarios. The holes in Prelogar's arguments will likely haunt the Dept. of Justice as the court considers its ruling.
Democratic narrative
The irony of "tough-on-crime" Republicans defending violent insurrectionists is on full display. The obstruction provision was clearly written to prohibit criminals from blocking government proceedings — Joseph Fischer is on the record saying that he would and then physically attempting to do so. This case is cut and dry, and Republicans should support it if they're true to their principles.