Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-5572_l6hn.pdf
Page Number: 1

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2023 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

FISCHER v. UNITED STATES 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 

No. 23–5572.  Argued April 16, 2024—Decided June 28, 2024 

The  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002  imposes  criminal  liability  on  anyone 
who corruptly “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, docu-
ment, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair
the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.”
18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(1).  The next subsection extends that prohibition
to anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official
proceeding,  or  attempts  to  do  so.”    §1512(c)(2).    Petitioner  Joseph
Fischer was charged with violating §1512(c)(2) for his conduct on Jan-
uary  6,  2021.    On  that  day,  Congress  convened  in  a  joint  session  to 
certify the votes in the 2020 Presidential election.  While they did so, 
a crowd of supporters of then-President Donald Trump gathered out-
side the Capitol, and some eventually forced their way into the build-
ing, breaking windows and assaulting police.  App. 189.  This breach 
of the Capitol delayed the certification of the vote.  The criminal com-
plaint alleges that Fischer was among those who invaded the building. 
Fischer was charged with various crimes for his actions on January 6,
including obstructing an official proceeding in violation of §1512(c)(2).  
He moved to dismiss that charge, arguing that the provision criminal-
izes only attempts to impair the availability or integrity of evidence. 
The  District  Court  granted  his  motion  in  relevant  part.  A  divided 
panel of the D. C. Circuit reversed and remanded for further proceed-
ings. 

Held:  To prove a violation of §1512(c)(2), the Government must establish
that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an 
official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used 
in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so. 

(a)  To  determine  the  scope  of  the  residual  “otherwise”  clause  in 
§1512(c)(2), the Court must decide how it is linked to its “surrounding