The recent Supreme Court decision to limit the scope of an obstruction charge used against January 6 Capitol rioters is now under heightened scrutiny as the resentencing of one rioter, Thomas Robertson, approaches, with indication that this case could test whether prison terms should be reduced in response to the court’s ruling.
Thomas Robertson, a former Virginia police officer, was initially sentenced to over seven years in prison for his involvement in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. However, his case is being re-evaluated following the Supreme Court’s decision, which narrowed the application of the obstruction charge under Section 1512(c)(2) of the statute.
Prosecutors argue that Robertson’s sentence should remain intact, insisting that the obstruction charge was not the only basis for his conviction and that the overall sentence is justified. On the other hand, Robertson’s defense team is pushing for a reduced sentence, pointing to the Supreme Court’s ruling as a significant factor in the original sentencing that now warrants reconsideration.
The Supreme Court’s decision has triggered challenges to the convictions of more than 350 rioters who were charged under the same obstruction statute. The court ruled that the provision should be applied narrowly, requiring proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents related to an official proceeding.
The outcome of Robertson’s resentencing could set a precedent for handling similar cases in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. A reduction in his sentence could pave the way for other rioters to seek resentencing or appeal their convictions based on the new interpretation of the obstruction charge.
Despite these legal challenges, the Department of Justice remains determined to hold those involved in the January 6 attack accountable. Attorney General Merrick Garland has emphasized that most cases will not be affected by the Supreme Court’s decision, as other charges still apply.
