The following podcast contains advertising to access an ad-free version of the LawFair

podcast become a material supporter of LawFair at patreon.com slash LawFair, that's patreon.com slash

LawFair. Also check out LawFair's other podcast offerings, rational security, chatter, LawFair

no bull, and the aftermath.

The Biggest Catastrophe for

the DOJ would be if Fisher is overruled or reversed and Judge Katzis is ruling or Judge

Nichols ruling, that was the original ruling is adopted. The whole subsection almost vanishes,

and becomes just a slightly broader version of the first subsection, which is about

evidence destruction, evidence foliation, evidence fooling around with evidence, tampering.

And so in that case, at least 317 cases, January 6th cases, probably you have to drop

that count.

I'm Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at LawFair, and this is the LawFair podcast, October 26th,

2023. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals last week faintly endorsed the Justice Department's

reading of a critical felony charge, corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding, which

the department has relied on to prosecute at least 317 individuals for their alleged

roles in the January 6th Capitol riot. In the case, United States versus Thomas Robertson,

the Court affirmed the Justice Department's conception of the definition of corruptly,

as stated in the charge. Robertson followed another DC Circuit ruling in April, United

States versus Fisher, which upheld the charge even more fragile. LawFair senior editor

Roger Parloff detailed the Court's Robertson decision on LawFair. I sat down with Parloff

to discuss Robertson, Fisher, and what it would mean for the Justice Department if its

interpretation of the corrupt obstruction statute is ultimately rejected. It's the LawFair

...