Just finished reading the decision. I follow their logic, and disagree completely.
1512(c) has 2 parts, that essentially say:
1 - You can't modify, destroy, or conceal documents in an attempt to make it unavailable for use in a proceeding
2- You can't otherwise obstruct, influence, or impede a proceeding
The majority in the decision ruled on the basis that item 2 is limited by item 1. In other words, since item 1 refers to records, documents, and other objects, then item 2 is also limited to those things. They argue that Item 2 cannot be broader than item 1, because if Congress meant for it to be broad, there was no reason to be specific in item 1.
This is complete crap. Our law books are full of examples where sections go from the specific to the general. This is how lawmakers create a sort of catch-all protection against certain harms. The "otherwise" clause is their way of saying "here are the specific ways that we've seen people do this, but just in case we didn't think of something, you can't otherwise do this either."
Under this ruling, if I'm due in court to answer for a charge, I'm not allowed to hide e-mails and other documents that might be relevant. But if I park my car in front of the courthouse doors and don't let people enter, I'm not obstructing the proceeding.
This court gets more ridiculous every day. I expect that on Monday they'll say that Trump has blanket immunity, and that sitting presidents can't commit crimes.
