Justice Neil Gorsuch threw out several hypotheticals — a sit-in that disrupted a trial, heckling that interrupted the State of the Union, or pulling a fire alarm that delayed a congressional vote — that suggested he was skeptical of the government’s broad reading of the statute, which carries a maximum imprisonment of 20 years.
Gorsuch asked Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar whether those actions would qualify for 20 years in prison. Prelogar tried to lay out the other elements of the crime — such as the corrupt intent and whether it was a meaningful disruption of an official proceeding — that the government would have to prove to charge and convict under the law in such examples.
Gorsuch, however, pushed back at her attempts to distinguish those circumstances from how the Justice Department is advocating for the statute to be interpreted in this case.