Supreme Court oral arguments on federal obstruction crime
Legal experts analyze Supreme Court oral arguments on whether a Jan. 6 rioter can be charged with federal obstruction crime, questioning the government's stance; potential implications for former President Trump's case discussed
Key Points
- Biden administration's stance questioned during oral arguments
- Concerns raised regarding the broad application of the obstruction statute
- Critique of government's handling of the case
Pros
- In-depth analysis of Supreme Court oral arguments
- Insight into potential implications for high-profile cases like former President Trump's
- Expert opinions from legal professionals
Cons
- Government's argument appeared weak and faced scrutiny from justices
- Lack of clarity on the application of the obstruction statute