CENTER FOR ETHICS AND THE RULE OF LAW​

Interpretation of a 2002 obstruction law could undermine charges against Trump 

Share this Post

Related posts

Green & Black Modern Dotted We Are Hiring Instagram Story (1200 x 840 px) (3)

Call for applications: Post-doctoral fellow

A summer day in front of the US Supreme Court Building in Washington, DC.

Teetering on the edge: The Trump administration’s congressional allies push forward the attack on the federal judiciary

2025SummerInternship_0259

Call for applications: CERL’s 2026 Summer Internship Program

CERL logo

CERL files FOIA request seeking release of secret OLC memo said to legally justify capture of Venezuelan president

AR 24-25 Cover

Read CERL’s 2024-2025 Annual Report

In a case that could undermine charges against former President Donald Trump, as well as over 350 rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, the Supreme Court will soon consider whether the prosecutors’ interpretation of a 2002 federal obstruction law can be used against the rioters. CERL’s Professor Claire Finkelstein spoke with John Fritze and Hannah Rabinowitz of CNN about what the court’s decision could mean not just for Trump and the rioters, but also for the Justice Department itself.  

Claire Finkelstein is the Algernon Biddle Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy and Faculty Director of the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law. Read her bio here.  

The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of any organization or university. 

Mailing List

Submissions

Submissions to The Rule of Law Post. Please refer to CERL’s submission guidelines for additional details on the blog post format. Should your submission be accepted, we ask that you please complete the Agreement to Transfer Copyright.

Please upload text in one document under 6 mb. Preferred format as a simple text file (.txt).

Share Interpretation of a 2002 obstruction law could undermine charges against Trump  on:

LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook
Reddit
Email
Print
Interpretation of a 2002 obstruction law could undermine charges against Trump