A US Supreme Court decision to review the Biden administration’s novel use of an Enron-era law in Capitol riot cases has had ripple effects, upending several ongoing trials and sentencings – potentially giving way to new trials or shorter sentences for defendants who could now benefit.
Attorneys representing several defendants have filed motions to halt or postpone trials or sentencing, contending that the Justice Department needs to reconsider its interpretation of 1512(c).
Judge Beryl Howell
Judge Howell was appointed to the District Court in 2010 following her graduation with honors in philosophy from Bryn Mawr College and her JD from Columbia University School of Law as a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar. Prior to becoming a judge, she served as staff and general counsel of the Senate Committee on Judiciary.
She is considering a request from the Justice Department to add the Jan. 6 rioting charge in their criminal prosecution of defendants. Prosecutors assert that alarms, “area closed” signage and police commands at the Capitol should have made clear Pence’s presence, providing sufficient evidence against his presence as grounds for charging those present with rioting.
Judge Howell also serves as an adjunct professor in legal ethics at American University’s Washington College of Law. Her writings focus heavily on first amendment and criminal law issues; she has addressed numerous national forums about this topic.
Judge Amit Mehta
Before President Obama appointed Mehta to the federal bench in 2014, Mehta spent much of his career practicing criminal prosecution and investigations at boutique DC law firm Zuckerman Spaeder LLP. While there, he represented numerous high-profile clients ranging from former Florida Rep Tom Feeney and International Monetary Fund President Dominique Strauss-Kahn among many others.
Mehta may remain somewhat obscure to the general public, yet his rulings provide insight into his personal life. For example, in a copyright case Mehta mentioned his passion for hip-hop music by quoting lyrics from Beyonce’s song “Sorry”.
Mehta is widely seen as an independent-minded judge who will not easily accept the government’s antitrust allegations against Google. He is likely to hold hearings on this matter and allow more of Justice Department exhibits online each day of trial – in contrast with his handling of Microsoft in the 1990s case which took place largely public courtroom with limited sealed testimony.
Judge Gregory Katsas
The Leadership Conference strongly opposes Gregory Katsas’ nomination to our nation’s second highest court as judge, due to his long record of working to restrict voting rights, LGBT rights, and access to women’s health care in various roles in both Bush and Trump administrations.
Katsas, appointed by Trump, noted in his dissenting opinion that Walker and Pan’s narrow interpretation of “corruptly obstructing an official proceeding” would subject activists and lobbyists who protest or lobby on their causes to criminal penalties as severe as up to 20 years in jail under their interpretation of the statute. As an example, demonstrators outside homes of conservative Supreme Court justices protesting over their decision to restrict abortion rights could potentially face jail time under this view of the statute.
Katsas’ ruling in the Capitol Riot Case bodes well for future prosecutions related to Jan. 6, but is likely to be joined in any subsequent decisions by other members of his panel, leading this matter through appeals court before reaching its ultimate destination at either full appeals court or Supreme Court for final resolution.
Judge Norman Pattis
Pattis has long roamed Connecticut’s courtrooms searching for trouble. He excels at handling cases that make people shudder — from child murderers to rapists.
He’s known to take on police and prosecutors head on and criticise misguided social-justice activism; yet he remains an outspoken defender of First Amendment rights.
Pattis is best-known for defending Alex Jones and other far-right conspiracy theorists in a defamation lawsuit brought by Sandy Hook parents and former members, and for representing alleged Capitol Hill rioter Joseph Biggs in court proceedings.
Pattis filed an official filing against his license suspension, alleging it to be “cruel and inhuman,” as his clients’ cases would suffer without him. To postpone implementing it until ruling is rendered on it by the Supreme Court – something it seems unlikely they’ll agree to when hearing this case in October.