Jack Smith got blindsided by a court’s ruling that has him in big trouble

Photo by Tyler Merbler, via Flickr, CC BY 2.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

Jack Smith has an unyielding determination to jail Donald Trump to help Joe Biden win the 2024 Election 

He’s running into major issues.

And Jack Smith got blindsided by a court’s ruling that has him in big trouble.

January 6 defendants to have their sentences reduced 

A unanimous verdict by a three-judge panel on the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that judges improperly lengthened the sentences of more than 100 January 6 defendants by incorrectly ruling they interfered with the “administration of justice,” which is only meant to apply to interrupting a court proceeding.

“Federal sentencing guidelines encourage judges to apply the ‘administration of justice’ enhancement to defendants who disrupt judicial proceedings like grand jury investigations or court hearings. The enhancement can increase recommended sentences by more than a year.” POLITICO reported.

That means these cases now return to the judges who must reduce the sentence – some of which were lengthened by more than a year – in a significant defeat for the Biden Department of Justice.

The judges ruled in favor of defendant Larry Brock who received a two-year prison sentence enhanced by his supposed interfering with the “administration of justice.”

Appeals court smacks down Biden DOJ and trial court judges 

The three judges on the appeals court panel – all Democrats – ruled the trial court judges improperly applied the interfering in the “administration of justice” standard.

“Brock’s interference with one stage of the electoral college vote-counting process — while no doubt endangering our democratic processes and temporarily derailing Congress’s constitutional work — did not interfere with the ‘administration of justice,’” the three judges wrote.

“Taken as a whole, the multi-step process of certifying electoral college votes — as important to our democratic system of government as it is — bears little resemblance to the traditional understanding of the administration of justice as the judicial or quasi-judicial investigation or determination of individual rights,” the panel added.

“To the extent that law enforcement is present, it is there to protect the lawmakers and their process, not to investigate individuals’ rights or to enforce Congress’s certification decision,” the opinion continued. “After all, law enforcement is present for security purposes for a broad variety of governmental proceedings that do not involve the ‘administration of justice’ — presidential inaugurations, for example, and the pardoning of the Thanksgiving Turkey.”

But the Democrat judges didn’t hand down this ruling to right a miscarriage of justice.

Instead, the Democrat judges used it to try and save the indictment against former President Donald Trump.

Ruling could be bad news for Jack Smith

Special Counsel Jack Smith charged Trump under a broad interpretation of the “obstructing an official proceeding” statute Congress passed after the Enron scandal.

A case appealing this statute to convict hundreds of Trump supporters – Fischer v. United States – is currently before the Supreme Court and the justices will hear oral arguments in April.

If the justices rule the Biden Justice Department improperly used the obstructing an official proceeding statute to jail Trump supporters then that will gut Smith’s indictment against Trump.

And it’s a bad sign for Smith that lower court judges are suddenly starting to fear the Biden DOJ overstepped.

You may also like...