Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-5572_l6hn.pdf
Page Number: 31.0

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

3 

BARRETT, J., dissenting 

classic means of obstruction.  Subsection (c)(2) then prohib-
its obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceed-
ing by means different from those specified in (c)(1), thereby
serving as a catchall.  The “enumerated” crimes in (c)(1) and
the “unenumerated crimes” in (c)(2) are similar “on one spe-
cific  dimension”:  “the  particular  similarity  specified  after
the  ‘otherwise.’ ”    Begay  v.  United  States,  553  U. S.  137, 
150–151 (2008) (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment).  Here, 
that means that each crime represents one means through
which to obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceed-
ing.

Joseph Fischer allegedly participated in a riot at the Cap-
itol that forced the delay of Congress’s joint session on Jan-
uary 6th.  Blocking an official proceeding from moving for-
ward  surely  qualifies  as  obstructing  or  impeding  the 
proceeding  by  means  other  than  document  destruction. 
Fischer’s alleged conduct thus falls within (c)(2)’s scope. 

II 
A 
Opting  for  a  narrower  approach,  the  Court  declines  to
take (c)(2) on its own terms.  Instead, it borrows the eviden-
tiary focus of (c)(1) to hold that a defendant violates (c)(2) 
only by “impair[ing] the availability or integrity for use in 
an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or . . . 
other  things  used in  the  proceeding.”    Ante,  at  16.  Other 
means  of  obstructing  a  proceeding—say,  by  shutting  it
down—are out. 

This  interpretation  might  sound  faithful  to  the  statute,
because  the  limit  comes  from  a  related  provision  rather 
than thin air.  But snipping words from one subsection and 
grafting them onto another violates our normal interpretive
principles.  “ ‘[W]e  ordinarily  resist  reading  words  or  ele-
ments into a statute that do not appear on its face.’ ”  Dean 
v. United States, 556 U. S. 568, 572 (2009) (quoting Bates v.