Some Jan. 6 rioters win early release, even before key Supreme Court ruling

[brooklynite]

Source: Washington Post

Federal judges have begun ordering the early release pending appeal of Jan. 6 defendants who challenged their sentences even though the Supreme Court is a week away from hearing arguments on whether a key charge brought against them is legally sound.

A Maryland man who carried a Confederate flag into the Capitol will be let go one year into his three-year term. An Ohio man who overran police lines and became one of the first rioters to enter the Capitol will be set free six months into a 19-month term. And a man who entered the just-evacuated Senate chamber with a Trump flag as a cape was released after serving five months of a 14-month term.

If the Supreme Court ultimately determines the charge they faced was legitimate, they and others who are released early pending appeal could be ordered to return to prison — but that is not a certainty.

The truncated sentences are the latest complications in the prosecution of more than 350 Jan. 6 defendants under a federal statute that makes it a crime to obstruct or impede an official proceeding — in this case, Congress’s joint session to confirm Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory.


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/10/jan-6-rioters-released-supreme-court/

[groundloop]

1. Bullshit.... their sentences were far too light as it is.

They fucking attempted to overthrow the government of the United States. Give me a break.

[The Grand Illuminist]

4. This is Chapter 115 in the constitution act.

They should have been facing execution for levying war. Yet no attorney has the guts to charge them.

[republianmushroom]

5. Agree.

[byronius]

2. May those brave and unfairly accused patriots --

-- have all their sentences doubled each time Trump speaks glowingly about them.

I've been to plenty of demonstrations, and all of them were composed of two general sides: patriotic democrats and violent republicans. I've seen it up close and personal, and it can be pretty damned scary. Right-wing males tend to have a cartoonish inner world, often full of cruel and childish opinions they don't voice out loud unless they're in similar company..

The January 6 rioters deserve that time. Reducing their sentences is an open invitation to commit further public violence.

Dangerous times proceed from incompetent men in power.

[TomSlick]

3. The article is behind a pay-wall and I really don't want to give the Post money.

What were the reasons for the early release?

[ancianita]

7. Here.

https://archive.ph/S5mGZ

Julie Rose O’Sullivan, a Georgetown law professor and expert on white-collar criminal law, said it was a potentially bad sign for prosecutors that the Supreme Court took the case when there is such strong support for the law at lower levels, including two split opinions upholding the government’s use of the statute in Jan. 6 cases by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case next Tuesday and issue its ruling by the end of the term in late June or early July. A reversal would not affect the majority of the 1,350 Jan. 6 riot defendants, most of whom are charged either with violent felony offenses or with only misdemeanor violations such as trespassing or disorderly conduct at the Capitol. But it could wreak havoc on more than 100 cases in which obstruction — or corruptly impeding — Congress’s lawful certification of the 2020 election is the only felony charge the defendant faces. Currently, about half of 120 sentenced cases fall in that category.
A Supreme Court ruling against the obstruction charge could also impact the election interference case that special counsel Jack Smith has brought against Trump. Two of the four counts the former president and presumptive 2024 Republican nominee faces are conspiring to and actually obstructing the certification of the election, underscoring the stakes of the high-court review.

A full rejection by the court “would have a devastating effect on the prosecution side” in Capitol attack felony cases that don’t otherwise involve violence, recently retired U.S. District judge Thomas F. Hogan, who sentenced 26 Jan. 6 defendants, said in a talk to Georgetown Law School students earlier this year. For some, the obstruction charge brought the stiffest penalty, and removing it would mean they would have to be resentenced or retried and face far less severe consequences. It is punishable under statute by up to 20 years in prison, although first-time offenders convicted in the Capitol riot have received far less time, typically one to four years. A federal appeals court also recently overturned a sentencing enhancement used to help determine the punishments for Jan. 6 defendants convicted of the felony.

Defendants still awaiting trial could take tougher stances with prosecutors in plea talks if the Supreme Court takes the charge off the table. And those who have pleaded guilty to obstruction but have not yet been sentenced could withdraw those pleas.

It seems to me that if the court overruled lower courts on obstruction, it ties the government's enforcements hands and opens the door to more coup chaos. I hope that court will uphold the DOJ, Smith and lower courts' enforcements.

[TomSlick]

11. I understand the importance of the pending SCOTUS case.

What I don't understand is why courts are ordering early release before the SCOTUS decision comes down.

[HAB911]

6. Great

releasing terrorists back into the general population during an election year. What could go wrong?

[orangecrush]

8. This is what will embolden the next insurrection

.

[SergeStorms]

9. Why, it's almost as if.....

these lower court judges know how the SC will rule in the future!

But that's impossible, right?

Unless it isn't.

[oasis]

10. Vindicated. Will be first word

used by these released traitors.