What does that mean for the breadth of this statute?

Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify?

Would a heckler in today's audience qualify or at the

State of the Union address, would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?

There are multiple elements of the statute that I think might not be satisfied by those

hypotheticals and it relates to the point I was going to make to the chief justice about the breadth of this statute.

The kind of built-in limitations are the things that I think would potentially suggest that

many of those things wouldn't be something the government could charge or prove as 1512 C2 beyond a reasonable doubt,

would include the fact that the Actus Reis does require obstruction, which we understand to be a meaningful interference.

So that means that if you have some minor disruption or delay

or some minimal outbursts, we don't think it falls within the

atmosphere to begin with.

So my outbursts require the court to reconvene after the proceeding has been brought back into line, or the pulling of

the fire alarm, the vote has to be rescheduled, or the protest outside of a

courthouse makes it inaccessible for a period of time. Are those all federal felonies subject to 20- it

in accessible for a period of time.

Are those all federal felonies subject to 20 years in prison?

So with some of them it would be necessary to show nexus.

So with respect to the protest outside the court house,

we'd have to show that yes, they were aiming at the proceeding.

Yeah, they were trying to stop the proceeding.

Yes, and then we'd also have to be able to prove that they acted corruptly, and this sets a stringent

...