Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., is having the House vote on a border security bill alongside his proposal for foreign aid after its lack of measures to deal with the U.S. migrant crisis spurred threats of rebellion from his fellow Republicans.

‘After significant Member feedback and discussion, the House Rules Committee will be posting soon today the text of three bills that will fund America’s national security interests and allies in Israel, the Indo-Pacific, and Ukraine, including a loan structure for aid, and enhanced strategy and accountability,’ Johnson told GOP lawmakers.

Those three bills total $95.34 billion in proposed foreign aid – $60.84 billion for Ukraine, $26.38 billion for Israel, and $8.12 billion for the Indo-Pacific – roughly the same as the Senate’s bipartisan foreign aid package passed in February. It also includes provisions like banning funds for United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which aids Palestinian refugees.

A fourth bill would combine miscellaneous national security priorities, including the House’s recently passed bill that could pave the way to a TikTok ban and the REPO Act, a bipartisan measure to liquefy seized Russian assets and send that money to Ukraine, as well as ‘sanctions and other measures to confront Russia, China, and Iran,’ according to Johnson.

‘The Rules Committee will also be posting text on a border security bill that includes the core components of H.R.2,’ Johnson said.

H.R.2 is a comprehensive border security bill passed by House Republicans last year, which includes measures like the Trump administration-era ‘Remain In Mexico’ policy and would expand expulsion authorities for law enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico border. Democrats have panned H.R.2 as a nonstarter.

The border security bill would move through the House Rules Committee separately from his four foreign aid bills, but each is being teed up for a Saturday evening vote.

Johnson said lawmakers would be able to submit amendments for all five pieces of legislation as well. 

It comes as he’s also dealing with threats led by Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to oust him from power over the foreign funding. But Congress has been under mounting pressure to find a way forward in aiding Israel and Ukraine as conflicts in both regions escalate at an alarming rate.

That proposal, unveiled Monday, almost immediately got pushback from House Republicans who demanded that he leverage their razor-thin majority to include U.S. border policy provisions alongside any foreign aid. 

But the rebellious flank of his conference is already signaling that his new plan may not be enough – and that Johnson will need to seek help from Democrats to advance his foreign aid plans.

‘Anything less than tying Ukraine aid to real border security fails to live up to [Johnson’s] own words just several weeks ago. Our constituents demand – and deserve – more from us,’ Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., wrote on X.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, similarly said, ‘The Republican Speaker of the House is seeking a rule to pass almost $100 billion in foreign aid – while unquestionably, dangerous criminals, terrorists, & fentanyl pour across our border. The border ‘vote’ in this package is a watered-down dangerous cover vote. I will oppose.’

And Heritage Action, a key conservative group, is warning that it’s against Johnson’s idea to combine the four foreign aid bills before sending them to the Senate. 

‘While each bill may receive individual votes, any effort to combine the measures before sending them to the Senate undermines the intent to consider the bills on their own merits. Attempting to circumvent accountability for a vote on any of the individual bills with the understanding that they will be combined on the back end is disingenuous for members who claim to oppose the Senate-passed foreign aid supplemental,’ the group said,

House Democrats are signaling that they are open to making a deal to help House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., keep his job if Republican rebels file a motion to oust him from leadership.

Several Democrats who spoke with Fox News Digital said they think their colleagues would insulate the Louisiana Republican if he put legislation on foreign aid on the House floor for a vote – specifically singling out Ukraine and Israel – though they all maintained that they would follow the lead of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and other Democratic leaders.

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told reporters, ‘I think it’s unlikely I would support vacating him. We’ll see.’

‘The big thing is, I want a vote on Ukraine. More to the point, I want Ukraine to get the aid. We waited months longer than we should have for highly questionable reasons. Now we’re down to the last minute, Ukraine’s hanging on by their fingernails,’ Smith said.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., became the second GOP lawmaker after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., to threaten to file a motion to vacate against Johnson, which would trigger a vote on his ouster. Massie told Johnson in a closed-door Tuesday House GOP meeting that Johnson should step aside after a vote happens on his recently announced foreign aid plan or face the threat of losing his gavel.

Democrats do not necessarily have to vote against ousting Johnson. Any vote on vacating him would likely be preceded by a vote to table the motion, which would effectively kill it. Likewise, simply not showing up to vote on a motion to vacate would make the margins more favorable for Johnson.

The Louisiana Republican is leader of a razor-thin House GOP majority of just two seats. While that means that just a small amount of dissent can cost him the job, it also means he would likely only need a few Democrats to help him keep it.

‘I think Democrats are very open to a deal, but that has to come from Republicans,’ Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., said on Tuesday.

When asked if Johnson would have to reach out to Democrats to initiate that deal, Moulton said, ‘Of course, he’s the Speaker of the House. It’s his f—ing job.’

Moulton, however, said passing aid to Ukraine would not be enough in exchange for the Democrats’ help. ‘The bar’s been pathetically low for the Republican Party for a long time. But no, in my personal opinion, simply doing his job and allowing a democratic vote on legislation is not enough for a deal,’ he said, though he did not elaborate on what a deal should entail.

Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., told Fox News Digital that Jeffries signaled there is a way forward for Johnson to make a deal with Democrats. 

‘Hakeem Jeffries has made that clear a number of times. You know, I’ve said same thing – I hate the idea of punishing Mike Johnson for doing the right thing,’ Beyer, a progressive, told Fox News Digital in regard to a foreign aid plan. ‘The one I think most of us care the most about is Ukraine aid, and then secondarily, some kind of Israel-Gaza package.’

Beyer would not say if Johnson’s proposal on foreign aid would be enough for Democrats to help him, given the lack of legislative text, but he did not rule it out, either. Meanwhile, Johnson has faced bipartisan pressure to take up the Senate’s $95 billion supplemental aid package for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and Gaza.

‘Hopefully he’s found a way to manage his disruptive caucus by breaking it into pieces…without having to put the whole Senate bill on the floor, which is apparently not a winning strategy from his perspective,’ Beyer said.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., said he would consider voting to table a motion to oust Johnson if he put foreign aid up for a vote – if only not to empower the right wing of the Republican conference.

‘At the end of the day, if my job is to make sure that we can continue the world order, and that my job is to make sure that we get our allies the aid that they need so that our allies don’t look at the U.S. as a non-functioning body anymore, and turn to China and turn to Russia, if the idea is voting for a motion to table or letting [Massie and Greene] take this all down, yeah, I would vote for motion to table,’ Moskowitz said.

However, Republicans were skeptical about that being a permanent safety net.

‘I don’t think that works,’ Massie told reporters on Tuesday. ‘I think for every Democrat that comes to save him he’ll lose at least two or three more in our conference, and that makes it toxic.’

Another GOP lawmaker who spoke with Fox News Digital suggested Johnson would lose control of the House GOP conference if Democrats saved him during a vacate vote.

‘I think it’s a different conference then,’ the GOP lawmaker said. ‘If I’m the Democrats and I get asked to do that, the quid pro quo on that would make it enormously difficult to lead the conference. I mean, he’s really gonna be the leader of the uniparty then.’ 

Fox News Digital reached out to Johnson and Jeffries’ offices for comment.

Senate Republicans are introducing a bill on Wednesday that aims to prevent foreign nationals from improperly influencing American elections in response to a report outlining how a foreign billionaire allegedly funneled almost $250 million into a liberal dark money network that poured almost $100 million into nationwide ballot campaigns.

The Prevent Foreign Interference in American Elections Act, being introduced by Tennessee GOP Sen. Bill Hagerty, states that it will ‘amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to further restrict contributions of foreign nationals.’

The move comes after the Senate was briefed on a new report from Americans for Public Trust that shows Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss has sent more than $243 million to the Sixteen Thirty Fund which then invested $97.6 million in ballot campaigns across 25 states over the past decade. Those states included the key swing states of Michigan, Ohio, Colorado, and Nevada.

The tens of millions of dollars from the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which has also been funded by George Soros, went into ballot measures promoting abortion access, lessening drug penalties and prison sentences, raising the minimum wage, automatic voter registration and other progressive causes.

Wyss, who is referred to by some as the ‘new George Soros’, also allegedly gave more than $135 million between 2016 and 2020 to a nonprofit that gave tens of millions to Super PACs that supported Joe Biden in 2020 and has steered tens of millions of dollars to Democratic fundraising committees, get out the vote efforts, and Democratic candidates via nonprofits. 

‘A single Swiss billionaire, Hansjörg Wyss, has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into various left-wing causes meant to influence American politics,’ Honest Elections Project Executive Director Jason Snead told Fox News Digital last year. ‘Since 2016 he has given at least $245 million to Arabella Advisors’ dark money behemoths New Venture Fund and Sixteen Thirty Fund. In 2020 alone, CTCL (Center for Tech and Civic Life) received $25 million from New Venture Fund. CTCL and its new Alliance are opening avenues for foreign billionaires to pump funds directly into the heart of US elections.’

Caitlin Sutherland, who told Fox News Digital last year that Wyss is the ‘most influential figure in politics that you’ve never heard of’, wrote in the report’s forward that Sixteen Thirty Fund is using Wyss’s money as part of its ‘war chest’ to ‘support massive get out the vote drives, issue advocacy campaigns bolstering President Biden’s agenda, liberal pet projects from abortion to immigration, and attack ads against Republican lawmakers.’

Hagerty’s bill would clarify that the existing foreign-national ban on ‘indirect’ contributions covers attempts to circumvent the ban through intermediaries or instructions which conservatives have long argued poses a threat to Democracy when funds are dumped into dark money groups inside the U.S. from abroad.

‘Foreign nationals are prohibited from donating to U.S. political candidates, committees and super PACs but there is no federal law prohibiting foreign nationals from donating to ballot committees,’ the report’s conclusion explains. ‘Some state laws exist to try to prevent this type of foreign influence, but in a majority of states, foreign nationals like Hansjorg Wyss, are allowed to write blank checks to fund ballot issues that could prioritize their interests over those of the residents of the state.’

‘If state and federal law permits a Swiss billiionaire to fund ballot initiative campaigns, there is nothing stopping U.S. adversaries from Communist China, Russia, or North Korea from doing the same.’ 

The bill would prohibit foreign nationals from funding ballot harvesting and GOTV efforts, prohibit foreign nationals from funding U.S. election administration, and prohibit foreign nationals from spending money to influence ballot measures.

‘After years of hysteria over Russiagate and alleged foreign influence in American elections, it turns out Democrats have recently benefited from hundreds of millions of dollars in election-related contributions from a shadowy foreign billionaire, sidestepping the federal ban on foreign-national contributions in U.S. elections,’ Hagerty said in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

‘This type of influence undermines democracy and self-government here in America, and its staggering scope should be alarming. I’m pleased to introduce this commonsense and critical legislation that will put an end to covert foreign influence on our elections and protect Americans’ voice in electing their leaders.’

 In a statement, Sutherland said that ‘it is irresponsible and alarming that our laws leave the door open to foreign nationals and U.S. adversaries influencing American politics.’

‘Our report reveals that Sixteen Thirty Fund alone is acting as a conduit for massive amounts of money from a foreign billionaire with an expressed desire to reshape U.S. politics to align with his out-of-touch worldview. After years of national discourse about fears of foreign influence in our elections, this commonsense proposal to close the foreign influence loophole should be something everyone can support.’

In a statement to Fox News Digital, Sixteen Thirty Fund President Amy Kurtz said, ‘APT is Leonard Leo’s attack machine and is targeting Sixteen Thirty Fund because they oppose our work to support progressive causes.’

House Democrats in the ultra-progressive ‘Squad’ are being bolstered by a new joint fundraising venture as they face mounting threats to their jobs.

The ‘Protect The Squad’ website that was launched by Justice Democrats, a progressive PAC, appears to have been launched within the last week and is linked to Democratic fundraising giant ActBlue. It is the latest effort to insulate a group of progressive lawmakers who have faced bipartisan backlash over their harsh rhetoric toward Israel after Hamas’ Oct. 7 surprise attack.

‘Every member of the Squad is up for re-election this year, and five of these young, working-class, Black and brown progressives are facing serious threats to their U.S. House seats: Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, Summer Lee, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib,’ the website stated.

‘With right-wing megadonor-funded groups like AIPAC and Moderate PAC threatening to drop upwards of $100 million on attack ads and hand-picked challengers to unseat these Squad members, we need to come together to combat their attacks with the power of our grassroots movement.’

Of the ‘Squad’ members listed – which notably excludes Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., one of the group’s original members – Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., is the only one not yet facing a primary challenger.

The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a pro-Israel group that works with both Republicans and Democrats to bolster the Middle Eastern U.S. ally’s relationship with Washington. AIPAC is spending heavily this election cycle to promote pro-Israel candidates.

AIPAC has endorsed primary challengers to Reps. Cori Bush, D-Mo., and Jamaal Bowman D-N.Y.

Tlaib said on Instagram this week that ‘Protect The Squad’ is aiming to raise $100 million by April 30.

‘Our Squad is strong, but our movement is under attack from GOP-funded corporate Super PACs,’ Tlaib wrote. ‘Together-for Palestine, for workers, for abortion rights, for LGBTQ+ people, for democracy-we’re unstoppable. We’re coming together to raise $100K for them all, chip in now!’

The issue of Israel has brought long-simmering divisions within the Democratic Party up to the surface in the wake of Oct. 7, though a growing number of lawmakers on the left have been increasingly critical of Israel’s responding invasion of Gaza.

Iran’s president has vowed to completely destroy Israel, should it proceed with even the ‘tiniest invasion’ of its country.

President Ebrahim Raisi spoke Wednesday at an annual army parade warning Israel of a ‘massive and harsh’ response, as the country braces for potential Israeli retaliation after Iran’s missile and drone attack over the weekend.

Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel on Saturday in response to an apparent strike on Iran’s embassy compound in Syria on April 1 that killed 12 people, including two Iranian generals. Iran blames Israel for the attack, although Israel has not claimed any involvement.

Raisi said Saturday’s attack was a limited one, and that if Iran was provoked to carry out a bigger attack, ‘nothing would remain from the Zionist regime,’ the official IRNA news agency reported.

Raisi’s remarks came during a military parade that was relocated to a barracks north of the capital, Tehran, from its usual venue on a highway in the city’s southern outskirts. Iranian authorities gave no explanation for the relocation.

Uniquely, state TV did not broadcast it live, as it had in previous years.

On Saturday, Israel, with help from the U.S., the United Kingdom, neighboring Jordan and other nations, successfully intercepted nearly every missile and drone that Iran launched. Israel boasted of a 99% success rate, through the use of its Iron Dome and David’s Sling systems.

Israel has vowed to respond, however, without providing additional details on how or when.

The Jewish country’s military council met on Tuesday to decide on future action while its allies have urged all sides to avoid further escalation.

Israel and Iran have waged a shadow war for decades, with the war coming to a head over the past few months as Iran has supported Hamas, which carried out the deadliest terror attack in Israel’s history on Oct. 7.

Saturday’s attack was the first direct Iranian military attack on Israel.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A government watchdog group is suing the Biden administration over documents it has sought via information request related to proposed regulations targeting menthol cigarettes.

Protect the Public’s Trust (PPT) filed a federal lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), alleging that the agency has violated its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Protect the Public’s Trust submitted four FOIA requests for documents pertaining to the proposed federal menthol cigarette ban with HHS and subagency the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) late last year, all of which have gone unfulfilled.

PPT describes itself as nonpartisan, a ‘project dedicated to ensuring there is only one standard – one set of rules that our leaders must live by no matter what party affiliation or ideological bent,’ according to its website. It’s headed by Michael Chamberlain, a former communications official at the Department of Education in the Trump administration.

‘The Biden administration and FDA probably thought they would be greeted as conquering heroes when they announced the menthol ban,’ Chamberlain said in a statement. ‘But the science and, as they soon found out, the politics appear to be a lot more complicated than that.’

‘The rule is highly controversial, and it’s important for the American public to understand the factors driving the administration’s actions here,’ he added. ‘But, despite our best efforts and Mr. Biden’s claim of running the most transparent administration in history, the agencies won’t produce records. That seems to indicate there’s something they don’t want the public to know.’

PPT filed its FOIA requests with HHS and FDA in December. The requests asked for communications between several senior officials related to the menthol ban.

However, in the more than 90 days since the four requests, HHS has not produced responsive documents and has not communicated the scope of the documents it intends to produce or withhold, according to PPT. As such, the group argues that HHS has not met its statutory obligations to provide the requested records for the FOIA requests.

‘Through HHS’ failure to either to make a determination within the time period required by law, PPT has constructively exhausted its administrative remedies and seeks immediate judicial review,’ the lawsuit states.

HHS, which was listed as the sole defendant in the lawsuit, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Meanwhile, the White House has repeatedly missed target dates for finalizing the proposed menthol cigarette regulations, the latest of which was this month, and it remains unclear when they will be finalized. The regulations, which would broadly ban menthol cigarette sales nationwide, were first proposed by the FDA two years ago and sent to the White House for final approval months ago.

The FDA said the proposal would reduce disease and even death from tobacco product use by reducing youth experimentation and addiction, while increasing the number of smokers that might quit. Tobacco smoking remains the leading cause of preventable death nationwide, according to the agency.

‘The FDA remains committed to issuing the tobacco product standards for menthol in cigarettes and characterizing flavors in cigars as expeditiously as possible; these rules have been submitted to the [Office of Management and Budget] for review, which is the final step in the rulemaking process,’ an FDA spokesperson recently told Fox News Digital. ‘As we’ve made clear, these product standards remain at the top of our priorities.’

At the same time, the proposed crackdown on menthol cigarettes has sparked a contentious debate between health advocates, who favor the regulations, and civil liberties and business groups, which oppose the regulations.

Groups representing minorities, like the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement and the nonprofit National Action Network – the latter of which was founded by civil rights leader the Rev. Al Sharpton – argue that banning menthol cigarettes while not restricting non-menthol cigarettes ‘puts a microscope on minority communities.’ They say it could increase the probability of negative interactions between police and minorities.

The National Organization of Black Law Enforcement, National Action Network, National Newspaper Publishers Association and civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump met with HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, FDA Commissioner Robert Califf and White House domestic policy adviser Neera Tanden to discuss the proposal in November, according to White House records.

The artist representing Israel at this year’s Venice Biennale in Italy, along with its curators, said Tuesday they will not open the Israeli pavilion until a cease-fire and hostage deal are reached in Israel’s months-long war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip.  

A sign on the window of the Israeli pavilion posted Tuesday and written in English reads: ‘The artist and curators of the Israeli pavilion will open the exhibition when a cease-fire and hostage release agreement is reached.’

In a statement, artist Ruth Patir, said she and the curators wanted to show solidarity with the families of the hostages ‘and the large community in Israel who is calling for change.’

‘As an artist and educator, I firmly object to cultural boycott, but I have a significant difficulty in presenting a project that speaks about the vulnerability of life in a time of unfathomed disregard for it,’ Patir said in the statement.

Israel is among 88 national participants in the 60th Venice Biennale, which runs from April 20-Nov. 24. The Israeli pavilion was built in 1952 as a permanent representation of Israel inside the Giardini, the original venue of the world’s oldest contemporary art show and the site of 29 national pavilions. Other nations show in the nearby Arsenale or at venues throughout the city.

But even before the statement, curators and critics had signed an open letter calling on the Biennale to exclude the Israeli national pavilion from this year’s show to protest Israel’s war in Gaza. Those opposed to Israel’s presence had also vowed to protest on-site.

Italy’s culture minister had firmly backed Israel’s participation, and the fair was opening amid unusually heightened security.

The national pavilions at Venice are independent of the main show, and each nation decides its own show, which may or may not play into the curator’s vision. Patir’s Israeli exhibit was titled ‘(M)otherland.’ 

The curators of the Israeli pavilion, Mira Lapidot and Tamar Margalit, said they were delaying the opening of the exhibit because of the ‘horrific war that is raging in Gaza,’ but that they hoped the conditions would change, so the exhibit could open for public view.

‘There is no end in sight, only the promise of more pain, loss, and devastation. The exhibition is up and the pavilion is waiting to be opened,’ they said. For now, a video work made by Patir can be seen through the pavilion window.

The (M)otherland exhibit was set to run from Saturday, April 20, through Sunday, November 24. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan released a statement Tuesday announcing that new sanctions will be placed against Iran in the wake of the regime’s attacks against Israel last weekend.

The new sanctions come amid Republican criticism of the Biden administration for purportedly not being tough enough on Iran, after the White House extended a waiver that allowed Iran to access to $10 billion of previously escrowed funds in November 2023.

In a press release, Sullivan announced that President Biden is ‘coordinating with allies and partners, including the G7, and with bipartisan leaders in Congress, on a comprehensive response.’

‘In the coming days, the United States will impose new sanctions targeting Iran, including its missile and drone program as well as new sanctions against entities supporting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iran’s Defense Ministry,’ the statement read. 

‘In addition, we continue to work through the Department of Defense and U.S. Central Command to further strengthen and expand the successful integration of air and missile defense and early warning systems across the Middle East to further erode the effectiveness of Iran’s missile and UAV capabilities.’

Sullivan said that the actions the U.S. is taking will ‘continue a steady drumbeat of pressure to contain and degrade Iran’s military capacity and effectiveness and confront the full range of its problematic behaviors.’

‘Over the last three years, in addition to missile and drone-related sanctions, the United States has sanctioned over 600 individuals and entities connected to terrorism, terrorist financing and other forms of illicit trade, horrific human rights abuses, and support for proxy terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Kataib Hezbollah,’ the statement added.

‘The pressure will continue. We will not hesitate to continue to take action, in coordination with allies and partners around the world, and with Congress, to hold the Iranian government accountable for its malicious and destabilizing actions.’

The Biden administration has been heavily criticized by Republicans over its treatment of Iran over the past three years. In addition to the November 2023 waiver extension, the White House also unlocked $6 billion in sanctions relief for Iran as part of a prisoner swap deal in September 2023 – mere weeks before the October 7 attacks. 

‘Under President Trump, Iran was broke,’ Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said on X Saturday. ‘President Biden gifted them billions of dollars and then naively said ‘don’t.’’

”Don’t’ is not a foreign policy. Joe Biden’s policies have funded Iran’s attack on Israel,’ Blackburn continued.

In October, White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby maintained to Fox News that the Iranian regime has had no access to any of the unfrozen funds.

‘It’s not that we’re not enforcing sanctions. We have been enforcing them. As a matter of fact, we’ve added sanctions. We’ve sanctioned 400 entities in Iran just in the beginning of this administration, let alone the sanctions that came before us,’ Kirby explained.

‘As for the fungibility, again, that money was never going to be tapped by the Iranian regime,’ he continued. ‘They were never going to see it themselves. It was always going to go to vendors that we approved to go to buy humanitarian assistance and medical and food… directly to the Iranian people. The regime was never going to see that or feel that, and they haven’t asked for it.’

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority expressed concern Tuesday over the federal government’s use of an obstruction law to prosecute a Jan. 6 Capitol riot defendant, which could have major implications for President Trump’s separate election interference case.

Joseph Fischer, a onetime police patrolman, is one of about 350 people charged by the Justice Department with ‘obstruction of an official proceeding’ in connection with the disruption of Congress’ certification of then-former Vice President Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump.

Trump is also facing that same obstruction count.

At issue is whether a federal law passed two decades ago to address corporate fraud and document destruction can be properly applied to those allegedly engaged in ‘assaultive conduct’ like participating in a riot.

Several on the bench expressed concern the obstruction statute sweeps too broadly into areas like peaceful but disruptive conduct.

‘Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial, or access to a federal courthouse, qualify? Would a heckler in today’s audience [inside the Supreme Court] qualify, or at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify?’ asked Justice Neil Gorsuch. He may have been referring to Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D–N.Y., charged with triggering a fire alarm in a House office building in a non-emergency.

But others on the court appeared to agree with the government’s view that Congress intended to allow a ‘classic catchall’ to include other obstructive behavior involving official proceedings.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the provision was designed to ‘cover every base,’ including the Capitol riots.

‘We’ve never had a situation before,’ she said, ‘with people attempting to stop a proceeding violently.’

A federal judge earlier dismissed the obstruction offense against three Jan. 6 criminal defendants, ruling it did not cover their conduct on the Capitol grounds. Those defendants include Fischer, Garret Miller of the Dallas area, and Edward Jacob Lang of New York’s Hudson Valley.

The high court accepted Fischer’s appeal for final review.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a 2019 Trump bench appointee, determined prosecutors stretched the law beyond its scope to inappropriately apply it in these cases, ruling a defendant must have taken ‘some action with respect to a document, record or other object’ to obstruct an official proceeding under the law.

The Justice Department challenged that ruling, and a federal appeals court in Washington agreed with prosecutors that Nichols’ interpretation of the law was too limited.

The relevant statute – 18 U.S. Code Section 1512(c)(2) – of the Corporate Fraud Accountability, part of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reads:  ‘Whoever corruptly… obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.’

Congress passed the law in 2002, after the Enron financial and accounting scandal. Executives at the Texas-based energy company were charged with fraud, and the company eventually went bankrupt.

Nichols, in his ruling in the Miller case, cited then-Senator Biden, who referred to the new provision at the time as ‘making it a crime for document shredding.’  

Both the government and Fischer – who was a North Cornwall Township police officer in Pennsylvania at the time – offer contrasting accounts of his actions on Jan. 6, 2021.

In his appeal, Fischer’s lawyers argued he ‘was not part of the mob that forced the electoral certification to stop; he arrived at the Capitol grounds well after Congress recessed.’

And while he admits entering the Capitol building and pushing his way through the crowd, Fischer claims he also helpfully returned a pair of lost handcuffs to a U.S. Capitol police officer. After being pepper-sprayed by law enforcement, the defendant then says he left the complex just four minutes after entering.

But the Justice Department says Fischer ‘can be heard on the video yelling ‘Charge!’ before pushing through the crowd and entering the building. Once inside, he allegedly ran toward a line of police officers with another rioter while yelling profanities.

And the prosecution points to text messages he sent just before attending the ‘Stop the Steal’ rally where Trump spoke – and the subsequent march to the Capitol.

‘Take democratic congress to the gallows,’ he said in one post, and ‘Can’t vote if they can’t breathe.. lol.’

Fischer has pleaded not guilty to several charges, including disorderly and disruptive conduct; assault, resisting or impeding law enforcement officers; civil disorder; and obstruction. His trial is pending. His legal team argues hindering or affecting an official proceeding is too ambiguous, as applied to Fischer’s conduct on the Capitol grounds.

For more than 90 minutes Tuesday, the justices offered a range of hypotheticals about how the relevant obstruction statute could be applied in other contexts.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised the criminal charges against Trump in the election interference case. She asked whether the charges were evidence-related over obstructing or impeding evidence and could be applied to Trump’s alleged efforts to disrupt the presidential electoral vote count and certification by Congress on Jan. 6.

‘Do you agree that the government could take a shot at proving that your client actually did try to interfere with … evidence because he was trying to obstruct the arrival of the certificates arriving to the vice president’s desk for counting?’ Barrett asked. 

Justice Clarence Thomas, who returned to the bench after missing Monday’s oral arguments for unexplained reasons, asked whether other violent, anti-government protests were prosecuted under the statute.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar struggled to find specific examples but did say the obstruction provision was used in document forgery and witness tampering cases.

‘For all the protests that have occurred in this court, the Justice Department has not charged any serious offenses,’ said Justice Samuel Alito, suggesting the obstruction statute was not being applied fairly. 

‘What happened Jan. 6 was very, very, serious. I’m not equating this with that,’ added Alito.’ But we need to find what are the outer reaches of this statute under your interpretation.’

Fischer awaits trial on six other criminal offenses and has pleaded not guilty.

‘Why aren’t those six counts good enough?’ Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked, questioning the necessity of adding the obstruction offense.

How a Supreme Court ruling in the Fischer case would affect Trump’s separate prosecution for election interference is unclear. If Fischer prevails, the former president could then ask the federal courts to formally dismiss his obstruction charge.

That could prompt a new round of separate legal appeals that might go back to the Supreme Court for final review.  

Nine days after oral arguments in the Fischer case, the justices are expected to hold a public session to debate whether Trump enjoys absolute immunity from prosecution for conduct in office when allegedly seeking to overturn the 2020 election results and certification.

That has paused Trump’s criminal conspiracy and obstruction trial indefinitely.

The separate challenge over the obstruction charge would also likely push the schedule well into next year.

The pending high court case is Fischer v. U.S. (23-5572). A ruling is expected by early summer.