‘Sheer mockery of courts’: SC slams HC shield for rowdy MLA

Supreme Court Rules That Some Jan. 6 Defendants Were Improperly Charged

Supreme Court Rules That , Some Jan. 6 Defendants, Were Improperly Charged. NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court voted to limit which defendants accused of taking part in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot can be charged by federal prosecutors. The decision also casts doubt on two out of the four felony counts in former President Donald Trump's election subversion indictment. According to conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that the U.S. government must prove , “that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding.”. NPR reports that prosecutors relied on a key criminal statute to prosecute over 350 participants of the Capitol riot. The statute makes it a crime to alter or destroy official documents, or to otherwise obstruct or impede official proceedings. Roberts wrote that the statute was not meant to broaden the meaning of the law to make it a catchall provision. . The decision will impact other cases related to Jan. 6, many of which will have to be resentenced, retried or defendants will be released. . NYU law professor Ryan Goodman authored a study that found only 346 of the 1,417 people charged in connection with the Capitol riot were charged under the obstruction statute. The study also found that 71 people are still awaiting trial on the obstruction charge, but over half of them are also charged with another felony. NPR points out that if found guilty of other felony charges, the sentencing judge is still allowed to use the charge of obstruction to determine the length of their sentence.

In narrow ruling, US Supreme Court allows emergency abortions in Idaho

Supreme Court Rules Against SEC's Authority to Impose Fines

Supreme Court Rules , Against SEC's Authority, to Impose Fines. NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court recently voted 6-3 against the Securities and Exchange Commission's policy on fraudulent conduct. . NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court recently voted 6-3 against the Securities and Exchange Commission's policy on fraudulent conduct. . Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's conservative majority, said the current rules deprive accused transgressors of their constitutional right to a jury trial. . Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's conservative majority, said the current rules deprive accused transgressors of their constitutional right to a jury trial. . The SEC relies on administrative law judges (ALJ) to make legal conclusions in cases brought before the agency. The Supreme Court's decision has the potential to send ripples through dozens of agencies, from labor rights to energy regulation. The Court did exclude from its decision those agencies dealing with federal benefits, while some conservative justices wanted the ruling to go further. The three liberal justices in dissent blasted the decision by the majority. . The case was brought by a former conservative radio host and hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, following an SEC fraud investigation. The case was brought by a former conservative radio host and hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, following an SEC fraud investigation. An in-house evidentiary hearing fined Jarkesy $300,000, ordered him to pay back almost $700,000 in ill-gotten profits and barred him from the securities industry. Jarkesy argued that he was entitled to a jury trial held in a federal court and that Congress lacked the power to delegate such authority to the SEC. NPR reports that Jarkesy's case was supported by a number of conservative and business groups, and individuals such as Elon Musk. NPR reports that Jarkesy's case was supported by a number of conservative and business groups, and individuals such as Elon Musk