First Two Jan. 6 Appeals Reach Supreme Court

Lastamender

Diamond Member
Dec 28, 2011
58,404
51,775
3,600
The SCOTUS should take these cases. The decision could free a lot of people. This has been a legal joke. Let's hope the SCOTUs is not amused.

The first case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—could impact hundreds of defendants accused of the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which carries a potential 20-year prison term, has been charged in 317 cases, according to the latest DOJ tally.
Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted under the law, which has never been used in such a way since it was implemented in 2002 as a means to curb corporate financial fraud.
The second case involves the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.
Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal charges: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and injuries to property for climbing on a statue at the edge of Capitol grounds.

Mr. Ibrahim comes from a military and law-enforcement family. Before joining the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Army intelligence. His brother is an Army veteran who became an FBI special agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mother was at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Ibrahim's appeal argues that even though he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally authorized by federal law to carry his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA regulations encourage agents to carry their weapons and credentials at all times, the appeals petition says.
"The prosecution of this case breaks faith with countless federal law enforcement officers who make themselves available around the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per agency directives," the document states.


"Failure to address the question of the law’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the public and the law enforcement officers in the application of the laws."

United States District Judge Timothy Kelly in March ruled against Ms. Medvin's motion to dismiss Count 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim under 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.

 
The SCOTUS should take these cases. The decision could free a lot of people. This has been a legal joke. Let's hope the SCOTUs is not amused.

The first case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—could impact hundreds of defendants accused of the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which carries a potential 20-year prison term, has been charged in 317 cases, according to the latest DOJ tally.
Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted under the law, which has never been used in such a way since it was implemented in 2002 as a means to curb corporate financial fraud.
The second case involves the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.
Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal charges: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and injuries to property for climbing on a statue at the edge of Capitol grounds.

Mr. Ibrahim comes from a military and law-enforcement family. Before joining the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Army intelligence. His brother is an Army veteran who became an FBI special agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mother was at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Ibrahim's appeal argues that even though he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally authorized by federal law to carry his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA regulations encourage agents to carry their weapons and credentials at all times, the appeals petition says.
"The prosecution of this case breaks faith with countless federal law enforcement officers who make themselves available around the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per agency directives," the document states.


"Failure to address the question of the law’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the public and the law enforcement officers in the application of the laws."

United States District Judge Timothy Kelly in March ruled against Ms. Medvin's motion to dismiss Count 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim under 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.

If it becomes legal to break into the Capitol to try to capture or murder politicians then things are going to get really wild
 
If it becomes legal to break into the Capitol to try to capture or murder politicians then things are going to get really wild

Things got really wild ever since the Clintons first invaded the WH, then we had the Kenyan traitor, now the Biden imposter, BLM, the stolen election and the Floyd riots followed by three years of fascism trying to arrest a president for defending his country against the usurpation.
 
Things got really wild ever since the Clintons first invaded the WH, then we had the Kenyan traitor, now the Biden imposter, BLM, the stolen election and the Floyd riots followed by three years of fascism trying to arrest a president for defending his country against the usurpation.
Lol yeah I remember when you righties were saying "This is America if Joe Biden wins" during the George Floyd riots while showing footage of America under Trump :lmao:
 
The SCOTUS should take these cases. The decision could free a lot of people. This has been a legal joke. Let's hope the SCOTUs is not amused.

The first case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—could impact hundreds of defendants accused of the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which carries a potential 20-year prison term, has been charged in 317 cases, according to the latest DOJ tally.
Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted under the law, which has never been used in such a way since it was implemented in 2002 as a means to curb corporate financial fraud.
The second case involves the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.
Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal charges: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and injuries to property for climbing on a statue at the edge of Capitol grounds.

Mr. Ibrahim comes from a military and law-enforcement family. Before joining the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Army intelligence. His brother is an Army veteran who became an FBI special agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mother was at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Ibrahim's appeal argues that even though he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally authorized by federal law to carry his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA regulations encourage agents to carry their weapons and credentials at all times, the appeals petition says.
"The prosecution of this case breaks faith with countless federal law enforcement officers who make themselves available around the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per agency directives," the document states.


"Failure to address the question of the law’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the public and the law enforcement officers in the application of the laws."

United States District Judge Timothy Kelly in March ruled against Ms. Medvin's motion to dismiss Count 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim under 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.

Excellent, so when they both flop I’ll expect for you to claim that SCOTUS is deep state and corrupt. Yawn…. Your shit is predictable and boring
 
Excellent, so when they both flop I’ll expect for you to claim that SCOTUS is deep state and corrupt. Yawn…. Your shit is predictable and boring
Why would they flop? Those cases are why we have a Supreme Court. You are a dumbass and you keep showing you are.
 
Why would they flop? Those cases are why we have a Supreme Court. You are a dumbass and you keep showing you are.
Yes they are why we have a SCOTUS and when they don’t go your way and back up all your Bs claims I predict you will not respect their decision and will call them corrupt
 
Lol yeah I remember when you righties were saying "This is America if Joe Biden wins" during the George Floyd riots while showing footage of America under Trump :lmao:
George Floyd or Palestinians.....same people are protesting and defacing monuments. BLM, Muslim Brotherhood, both Obama supporters.

They all should get the same justice the people at the Capital got on Jan 6th.

It's a real shame that the first black POTUS turned out to be a treasonous commie/Muslim sympathizer.
 
The SCOTUS should take these cases. The decision could free a lot of people. This has been a legal joke. Let's hope the SCOTUs is not amused.

The first case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—could impact hundreds of defendants accused of the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which carries a potential 20-year prison term, has been charged in 317 cases, according to the latest DOJ tally.
Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted under the law, which has never been used in such a way since it was implemented in 2002 as a means to curb corporate financial fraud.
The second case involves the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.
Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal charges: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and injuries to property for climbing on a statue at the edge of Capitol grounds.

Mr. Ibrahim comes from a military and law-enforcement family. Before joining the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Army intelligence. His brother is an Army veteran who became an FBI special agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mother was at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Ibrahim's appeal argues that even though he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally authorized by federal law to carry his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA regulations encourage agents to carry their weapons and credentials at all times, the appeals petition says.
"The prosecution of this case breaks faith with countless federal law enforcement officers who make themselves available around the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per agency directives," the document states.


"Failure to address the question of the law’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the public and the law enforcement officers in the application of the laws."

United States District Judge Timothy Kelly in March ruled against Ms. Medvin's motion to dismiss Count 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim under 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.


#lockemup #lockemallup
 
Maybe Chief Roberts will decide they are actually corporations and have corporate immunity.
For constitutional purposes?

CJ Roberts did not rewrite the ppaca. You're just another one of those who speaks in bumper stickers and memes without any interest in facts.

"Chief Justice Roberts said in the Court's decision that the shared responsibility payment within the mandate in the PPACA was a penalty that for constitutional purposes functions as a tax. The law was NOT reworded to say the payment is a tax."

 
ashley babbitt dead.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top