Will be resolved based on No. 23-5572, Fischer v United States. Will resolve based on the actual content of the opinion.
If they rule that 18 USC 1512(c)(2) requires some act relating to documents or evidence (other than obstructing the proceedings themselves), this will resolve NO even if some January 6 defendants did alter/destroy/steal documents.
Will resolve YES if the court rules that violently obstructing the proceedings violates the statute, even if they imply that this particular petitioner may not have violated the statute for some other reason. Will still resolve YES even if documents are somehow necessary, so long as the upshot is that substantially everyone who violently breached the Capitol would be guilty of this offense.
I will use my best judgment to apply the relevant interpretive rule if there are splintered opinions.
Will resolve N/A iff this leaves the Supreme Court without a ruling on the merits somehow.
So this part?
(2) Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person, or attempts to do so, with intent to—
(A)
influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding;
…
(3) The punishment for an offense under this subsection is—(B) in the case of—
(ii)
the use or attempted use of physical force against any person;
imprisonment for not more than 30 years; and
(C)
in the case of the threat of use of physical force against any person, imprisonment for not more than 20 years.
@Snarflak That is (a)(2) - we are looking at (c)(2):
(c)Whoever corruptly— . . . .
(2)
otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.