The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favor of J6 defendant Joseph Fischer, one of approximately 300 January 6th participants charged with obstruction by the DOJ. This ruling reverses a lower court decision and sends his case back to the D.C. Court of Appeals.
Fischer argued that the obstruction statute had only ever been used in cases of evidence-tampering and should not apply to his situation. SCOTUS agreed with his argument.
In another anticipated ruling, the high court sided with a group of fishermen who challenged a decades old legal doctrine that they say gave the administrative state too much power over their business.
In a 6-2 ruling where Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson did not participate, the court's majority said the federal rule promulgated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) requiring the fishermen to pay $700 a day for an "at-sea monitor" is out of the bounds Congress set for the federal agency.
The court's decision overruled what’s known as the Chevron doctrine — a legal theory established in the 1980s that says if a federal regulation is challenged, the courts should defer to the agency’s interpretation of whether Congress granted them authority to issue the rule, as long as the agency's interpretation is reasonable and Congress did not address the question directly.
Monday will be the final day of the term for the court, which means we know for sure there will be an opinion handed down about Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity from prosecution.
Texas Values released a statement praising the ruling:
“No child deserves a false sense of hope from the unscientific idea that they are not really the sex they are born. Today, the Texas Supreme Court agrees! This decision affirms what we already know, that doctors cannot mutilate children in the name of healthcare.”