Justice Gorsuch to U.S. Solicitor General: ‘Would Pulling a Fire Alarm Before a Vote Qualify for 20 Years in Federal Prison?’

PRELOGAR So let me ░░░░░░░░ to that in two ░░░░░░░░ I do want to ░░░░░░░░ a chance to address ░░░░░░░░ concerns about breadth But ░░░░░░░░ more fundamental point I ░░░░░░░░ is that I don ░░░░░░░░ even understand petitioner to ░░░░░░░░ suggesting that you can ░░░░░░░░ and match the verbs ░░░░░░░░ the nouns from c ░░░░░░░░ and c 2 in ░░░░░░░░ way Judge Nichols had ░░░░░░░░ more limited view that ░░░░░░░░ 2 exclusively focuses on ░░░░░░░░ objects It wouldn t ░░░░░░░░ to things like testimony ░░░░░░░░ of the limitation that ░░░░░░░░ gleaned from c 1 ░░░░░░░░ Katz is I think ░░░░░░░░ be in line with ░░░░░░░░ question would interpret it ░░░░░░░░ broadly And the basic ░░░░░░░░ is a textual matter ░░░░░░░░ that there is nothing ░░░░░░░░ the text of c ░░░░░░░░ itself to disclose what ░░░░░░░░ relevant similarity from c ░░░░░░░░ ought to be Instead ░░░░░░░░ think the relevant similarity ░░░░░░░░ obstruction of an official ░░░░░░░░ because that s the ░░░░░░░░ Congress chose Gorsuch General ░░░░░░░░ that s if that ░░░░░░░░ the case what work ░░░░░░░░ authorize do on your ░░░░░░░░ Because I think I ░░░░░░░░ might as I m ░░░░░░░░ you think that whoever ░░░░░░░░ obstructs influences or impedes ░░░░░░░░ official proceeding or attempts ░░░░░░░░ do so stands alone ░░░░░░░░ the otherwise I m ░░░░░░░░ hearing what work it ░░░░░░░░ Can you explain to ░░░░░░░░ what work it does ░░░░░░░░ your view PRELOGAR Yes ░░░░░░░░ the work that otherwise ░░░░░░░░ is to set up ░░░░░░░░ relationship between c 1 ░░░░░░░░ c 2 and make ░░░░░░░░ that c 2 does ░░░░░░░░ cover the conduct that ░░░░░░░░ encompassed by c 1 ░░░░░░░░ I acknowledge that Gorsuch ░░░░░░░░ that beyond that Beyond ░░░░░░░░ OK c 1 does ░░░░░░░░ things and the whole ░░░░░░░░ of the universe of ░░░░░░░░ impeding or or influencing ░░░░░░░░ conducted by c 2 ░░░░░░░░ that a fair summary ░░░░░░░░ your view PRELOGAR Yes ░░░░░░░░ there was a good ░░░░░░░░ for Congress to do ░░░░░░░░ this way crosstalk Gorsuch ░░░░░░░░ understand that If I ░░░░░░░░ so so what does ░░░░░░░░ mean for the breadth ░░░░░░░░ this statute Would a ░░░░░░░░ in that disrupts a ░░░░░░░░ or access to a ░░░░░░░░ courthouse qualify Would a ░░░░░░░░ in today s audience ░░░░░░░░ or at the State ░░░░░░░░ the Union address Would ░░░░░░░░ a fire alarm before ░░░░░░░░ vote qualify for 20 ░░░░░░░░ in federal prison PRELOGAR ░░░░░░░░ are multiple elements of ░░░░░░░░ statute that I think ░░░░░░░░ not be satisfied by ░░░░░░░░ hypotheticals and it relates ░░░░░░░░ the point I was ░░░░░░░░ to make the chief ░░░░░░░░ about the breadth of ░░░░░░░░ statute The kind of ░░░░░░░░ in limitations are the ░░░░░░░░ that I think would ░░░░░░░░ suggest that many of ░░░░░░░░ things wouldn t be ░░░░░░░░ the government could charge ░░░░░░░░ prove as 1512 c ░░░░░░░░ beyond a reasonable doubt ░░░░░░░░ include the fact that ░░░░░░░░ actus reus does require ░░░░░░░░ which we understand to ░░░░░░░░ a meaningful interference So ░░░░░░░░ means that if you ░░░░░░░░ some minor disruption or ░░░░░░░░ or some minimal outburst ░░░░░░░░ don t think it ░░░░░░░░ within the crosstalk Gorsuch ░░░░░░░░ So my outburst require ░░░░░░░░ court to reconvene after ░░░░░░░░ the proceeding has been ░░░░░░░░ back into line or ░░░░░░░░ pulling of the fire ░░░░░░░░ the vote has to ░░░░░░░░ rescheduled or the protest ░░░░░░░░ of a courthouse makes ░░░░░░░░ inaccessible for a period ░░░░░░░░ time Are those all ░░░░░░░░ felonies subject to 20 ░░░░░░░░ in prison PRELOGAR So ░░░░░░░░ some of them it ░░░░░░░░ be necessary to show ░░░░░░░░ So with respect to ░░░░░░░░ protests outside the courthouse ░░░░░░░░ have to show crosstalk ░░░░░░░░ I think I think ░░░░░░░░ have shown yeah they ░░░░░░░░ trying to stop the ░░░░░░░░ PRELOGAR Yes And then ░░░░░░░░ d also have to ░░░░░░░░ able to prove that ░░░░░░░░ acted corruptly And the ░░░░░░░░ of stringent mens rea ░░░░░░░░ s not even just ░░░░░░░░ mere intent to obstruct ░░░░░░░░ have to show that ░░░░░░░░ but we have to ░░░░░░░░ that they had corrupt ░░░░░░░░ in acting in that ░░░░░░░░ Gorsuch We went around ░░░░░░░░ tree yesterday PRELOGAR I ░░░░░░░░ know I I I ░░░░░░░░ the argument yesterday But ░░░░░░░░ guess what I would ░░░░░░░░ is that to the ░░░░░░░░ that your hypotheticals are ░░░░░░░░ on the idea of ░░░░░░░░ peaceful protest even one ░░░░░░░░ s quite disruptive it ░░░░░░░░ not clear to me ░░░░░░░░ the government would be ░░░░░░░░ to show that each ░░░░░░░░ these protesters crosstalk Gorsuch ░░░░░░░░ mostly peaceful protest that ░░░░░░░░ obstructs and impedes an ░░░░░░░░ proceeding for an indefinite ░░░░░░░░ would not be covered ░░░░░░░░ Not necessarily We would ░░░░░░░░ have to have the ░░░░░░░░ of intent and that ░░░░░░░░ crosstalk Gorsuch They intend ░░░░░░░░ do it all right ░░░░░░░░ Yes If they intend ░░░░░░░░ obstruct and we re ░░░░░░░░ to show that they ░░░░░░░░ that was wrongful conduct ░░░░░░░░ consciousness of wrongdoing then ░░░░░░░░ that s a 1512 ░░░░░░░░ 2 offense and Gorsuch ░░░░░░░░ does corruptly add in ░░░░░░░░ view PRELOGAR So corruptly ░░░░░░░░ the requirement that the ░░░░░░░░ conduct be wrongful and ░░░░░░░░ with consciousness of wrongdoing ░░░░░░░░ this traces to the ░░░░░░░░ s decision in Arthur ░░░░░░░░ where the Court said ░░░░░░░░ is a term with ░░░░░░░░ historical roots with a ░░░░░░░░ meaning and that it ░░░░░░░░ not just knowledge of ░░░░░░░░ actions which is the ░░░░░░░░ to obstruct in this ░░░░░░░░ but further requires that ░░░░░░░░ be done corruptly And ░░░░░░░░ to give you a ░░░░░░░░ concrete example of how ░░░░░░░░ has played out in ░░░░░░░░ January 6 prosecutions I ░░░░░░░░ point to the jury ░░░░░░░░ in the Robertson case ░░░░░░░░ we refer to and ░░░░░░░░ in part on page ░░░░░░░░ of our brief There ░░░░░░░░ jury was instructed that ░░░░░░░░ order to show the ░░░░░░░░ acted corruptly the jury ░░░░░░░░ to to conclude that ░░░░░░░░ had an unlawful purpose ░░░░░░░░ used unlawful means or ░░░░░░░░ and that he had ░░░░░░░░ of wrongdoing So I ░░░░░░░░ that that is an ░░░░░░░░ of what the jury ░░░░░░░░ asked to decide on ░░░░░░░░ of the mere intent ░░░░░░░░ obstruct.”