The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision on Friday mandating the recalculation of a sentence for a Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection participant, deeming the application of a particular federal statute for sentence enhancement as inappropriate. This ruling has the potential to impact the sentencing of over a hundred individuals convicted on felony obstruction charges related to the Capitol breach.
The controversy centers around the Justice Department’s requests for “administration of justice” enhancements under federal sentencing guidelines, typically applied to cases disrupting judicial proceedings, which can significantly extend a convict’s sentence. However, the Appeals Court contested the classification of Congress’s electoral vote certification on Jan. 6 as akin to a judicial proceeding.
The appellate judges—appointed during Democratic administrations—ruled unanimously in favor of reconsidering the sentencing of Larry Brock, who received a two-year prison term for obstructing Congress. The court maintained Brock’s felony conviction but directed a reevaluation of his sentence without the disputed enhancement.
The ruling distinguishes the electoral vote count as crucial to democracy but not equivalent to the judicial process of administering justice, despite the session’s significance and security presence. The court noted that law enforcement at such events aims to ensure safety and order, not to conduct judicial inquiries or enforce judicial outcomes.
This decision precedes a Supreme Court review on the broader applicability of obstruction charges for Jan. 6 defendants, which may have ramifications for the legal arguments surrounding former President Donald Trump’s indictment for allegedly obstructing the same congressional session. The high court’s forthcoming ruling could further clarify the legal boundaries for charges related to obstructing governmental processes.
