Quantcast

Have Obama and Eric Holder transformed the Office of the Attorney General from a prosecutor upholding the laws and justice to an OBSTRUCTOR of justice instead?

tncdel 2012/06/12 03:37:03
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Protection of Government Processes—Obstruction of Justice—Scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1503

Section 1503 of Title 18, United States Code, as amended by the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, forbids tampering with or retaliating against any grand or petit juror, or any officer in or of any court of the United States by threats or force or by "endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede." Section 1503 also contains an omnibus clause prohibiting the obstruction of "the due administration of justice." By virtue of the omnibus clause, many courts have held that it is possible to obstruct justice under section 1503 by means similar to, but different from, those specifically enumerated in the first part of the provision. United States v. Saget, 991 F.2d 702, 713 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 950 (1993); United States v. Neal, 951 F.2d 630, 632 (5th Cir. 1992); United States v. Rasheed, 663 F.2d 843, 850-52 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, sub. nom.Phillips v. United States, 454 U.S. 1157 (1982). A party may be prosecuted under section 1503 for endeavoring to obstruct justice, United States v. Neal, supra; United States v. Williams, 874 F.2d 968, 976 (5th Cir. 1989); it is no defense that such obstruction was unsuccessful, United States v. Edwards, 36 F.3d 639, 645 (7th Cir. 1994); United States v. Neal, supra; or that it was impossible to accomplish, United States v. Bucey, 876 F.2d 1297, (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1004 (1989); United States v. Brimberry, 744 F.2d 580 (7th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1039 (1987).

The term "officer in or of any court of the United States" includes:

  • United States District Judges, United States v. Jones, 663 F.2d 567 (5th Cir. 1981) (by implication);United States v. Glickman, 604 F.2d 625 (9th Cir. 1979) (by implication), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1080 (1980); United States v. Fasolino, 586 F.2d 939 (2d Cir. 1978) (per curiam) (by implication); United States v. Margoles, 294 F.2d 371, 373 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 930 (1961);

  • United States Attorneys, Jones, supra; United States v. Polakoff, 112 F.2d 888, 890 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 653 (1940);

  • United States Bankruptcy Judges, United States v. Fulbright, 69 F.3d 1468 (9th Cir. 1995) (by implication);

  • Supreme Court Justices, United States Courts of Appeals Judges, United States Magistrate Judges, clerks of Federal courts, law clerks to Federal judges, Federal court staff attorneys, Federal court reporters, Federal prosecutors and defense counsel.

Because 18 U.S.C. § 1503 applies to civil, as well as criminal judicial proceedings, Roberts v. United States, 239 F.2d 467, 470 (9th Cir. 1956); Sneed v. United States, 298 F. 911, 912 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 265 U.S. 590 (1924); see Nye v. United States, 137 F.2d 73 (4th Cir.) (by implication), cert. denied, 320 U.S. 755 (1943), private attorneys are, arguably, also covered by the statute.

A venireman is a "petit juror" within the meaning of section 1503. United States v. Jackson, 607 F.2d 1219, 1222 (8th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1080 (1980); see United States v. Osborn, 415 F.2d 1021, 1024 (6th Cir. 1969) (en banc), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1015 (1970).

The majority of United States Courts of Appeals have held that 18 U.S.C. § 1503 may be used to charge a defendant with witness tampering. United States v. Moody, 977 F.2d 1420 (11th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 944 (1993); United States v. Kenny, 973 F.2d 339 (4th Cir. 1992); United States v. Branch, 850 F.2d 1080 (5th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 1018 (1989); United States v. Risken, 788 F.2d 1361 (8th Cir.),cert. denied, 479 U.S. 923 (1986); United States v. Rovetuso, 768 F.2d 809 (7th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1076 (1986); United States v. Lester, 749 F.2d 1288 (9th Cir. 1984). But see United States v. Masterpol, 940 F.2d 760 (2d Cir. 1991) (construing the 1988 amendment to section 1512 as evidence of Congress's intent that witnesses were removed entirely from section 1503).
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Freeranger 2012/06/12 12:09:19
    YES [explain why you think so].
    Freeranger
    +4
    This administration is in a shambles, and the Attorney General's office is little more than the facade, not unlike those built for a movie stage lot.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • sglmom 2012/06/22 01:20:31
    YES [explain why you think so].
    sglmom
    +1
    Right from the get go too . .
    when the Slam-Dunk case ..
    (that was even filmed by local newscasters)
    of Voter Intimidation/Threats at polling places
    by the NBPP ..
    was "Swept" under the 'rug' ..

    It's been quite a pattern indeed .. that this 'body politic' administration .. and their appointees .. all follow the 'obstructionist' line
  • newhon63 2012/06/14 03:23:57
    YES [explain why you think so].
    newhon63
    +1
    Don't even think anyone needs to point out times when the President and/or Holder has obstructed justice. The most recent being Holder "ordering Florida to cease and desist removing illegal aliens from the voters registry." When the President purposely waited for Congress to recess and then through Executive Order appointed whoever he wanted to positions he wanted them in. I believe he did that on several occasions. I am no lawyer but he skirted the process when he did that, to me it was marginally legal if it was legal at all.
  • topcat128 2012/06/13 00:35:20
    YES [explain why you think so].
    topcat128
    +1
    In my opinion, Holder is the worst Attorney General this country has ever had. Should have been removed from office long ago.
  • frank 2012/06/12 16:38:47
    YES [explain why you think so].
    frank
    +1
    Holder has turned the Justice Department into office of Injustice. Holder is now stopping States from enforcing the law.
  • none 2012/06/12 16:17:26
    YES [explain why you think so].
    none
    +2
    They've done one hell of a good job of it too. NOBAMA in 2012 and NOHOLDER either.
  • newhon63 none 2012/06/14 03:31:51
    newhon63
    +2
    I hesitate to say IF, but I am a realist and with the Entitlement culture we live in right now, Obama has a chance of finishing what he started. I hope not. BUT if he is voted out, I don't see Holder being allowed to keep his job by the new administration. He will be investigated and found wanting. I think he is past ripe for investigation and prosecution. I think Obama will be investigated too, but he is a slippery eel and if things get too hot for him, he will throw Holder under the bus with both hands and a foot.
  • none newhon63 2012/06/14 15:58:06
    none
    +1
    Obama is the kind of person that only thinks about himself, he'd do anything, say anything, or throw anyone under the bus to save his butt.
  • Freeranger 2012/06/12 12:09:19
    YES [explain why you think so].
    Freeranger
    +4
    This administration is in a shambles, and the Attorney General's office is little more than the facade, not unlike those built for a movie stage lot.
  • mwg0735 2012/06/12 06:40:55
  • TheTruth1313 2012/06/12 06:26:07
    YES [explain why you think so].
    TheTruth1313
    +4
    Holder wouldn't know how to be impartial even if he had a manual in front of his face. It is time to put an end to this Obama dog and pony show.
  • wtw 2012/06/12 03:58:27
    YES [explain why you think so].
    wtw
    +3
    They have withheld information and refused to cooperate on fast and furious and have leaked secrets of our allies and military secrets which are unpatriotic.
  • lark 2012/06/12 03:46:25
    YES [explain why you think so].
    lark
    +3
    He goes after anyone that opposes the POTUS but does not bring justice on others. Phila. Black Panthers last election for example.
  • David Hussey 2012/06/12 03:44:26
    NO [tell us why you think not].
    David Hussey
    +1
    No, they have just carried on in the manner of the previous adnministration. No transformation here, just more of the same criminality from the DoJ
  • tncdel David H... 2012/06/12 16:16:57
    tncdel
    +1
    Not at all. Any wrongs by Bush weren't directed at the American people, nor was racism involved [Black Panthers, ACORN, etc.].
  • David H... tncdel 2012/06/13 01:07:34
    David Hussey
    Okay, not the same criminality... different criminality. But criminality none the less. You either uphold the law or you do not, and neither admin has shown much interest in upholding the law
  • newhon63 David H... 2012/06/14 04:08:31
    newhon63
    +1
    Knock it off. Obama has been in office for almost an entire term,along with his boy, Holder, Kagan and all the others he installed like a cheap stove dishwasher and air conditioner while Congress was in recess. The time is way past blaming anything on the Bush terms. Obama owns everything that is going on right now. He promised to change things and he didn't. He can't blame anything on anyone but himself. He can't blame it on Congress either. Unless I am mistaken, he had 2 full years of Democratic Majority House, not sure right now but I think he was in pretty good shape in the Senate as well( Can someone tell me off-hand what majority held the Senate after the 2008 election?) and he STILL couldn't get anything passed and he even had Nancy "BUBBLES" Pelosi as Majority Leader. He had his focus on his OBamaCare, which is now being looked at to see if it is Constitutional to make Americans buy Insurance, so really that maybe a wash. So between that and having his lips on the butts of every leader of the MIddle East(except our only friend, Israel, whom he's made time to throw them under the bus) for the first 2 years, he hasn't had time to do anything meaningful for this country. Bottom line? His 4 years has pretty much been a waste, the only thing he did right that I can think of...



    Knock it off. Obama has been in office for almost an entire term,along with his boy, Holder, Kagan and all the others he installed like a cheap stove dishwasher and air conditioner while Congress was in recess. The time is way past blaming anything on the Bush terms. Obama owns everything that is going on right now. He promised to change things and he didn't. He can't blame anything on anyone but himself. He can't blame it on Congress either. Unless I am mistaken, he had 2 full years of Democratic Majority House, not sure right now but I think he was in pretty good shape in the Senate as well( Can someone tell me off-hand what majority held the Senate after the 2008 election?) and he STILL couldn't get anything passed and he even had Nancy "BUBBLES" Pelosi as Majority Leader. He had his focus on his OBamaCare, which is now being looked at to see if it is Constitutional to make Americans buy Insurance, so really that maybe a wash. So between that and having his lips on the butts of every leader of the MIddle East(except our only friend, Israel, whom he's made time to throw them under the bus) for the first 2 years, he hasn't had time to do anything meaningful for this country. Bottom line? His 4 years has pretty much been a waste, the only thing he did right that I can think of is his stimulus package saved the auto industry, but did he take a look at that and say" Hey! Is it really a good idea to have a whole nation in danger of tanking if one industry goes under?"

    It's true. Had the auto industry went under, we would be in deep doo-doo. It had to be done, but that needs to be fixed, but that can't be fixed by government. That has to come from the auto companies, themselves by telling what the workers can do with their big hourly wages and big bonuses, as well as the big show retirement if they don't break out with competitive cars. Since the auto workers were asleep at the wheel for so many years, basking in the glory of the Auto Workers' Union and the unreasonable demands in exchange for substandard work that resulted in substandard cars. The Japanese now have plants right here in the U.S.A., so now they don't even have to pay to get them over here to sell them.

    Yea, I know, they hired workers to build them here. But do you think they let their workers booze it up and make cars? Sure they do. For the amount of time they do it until they get caught and fired. And it sticks. I don't want to hear about how it isn't so. I grew up around one of the plants. It was fun to watch you guys go into a bar for lunch and when the buzzer went off to go back,you would all go staggering back to work to build cars.
    (more)
  • David H... newhon63 2012/06/14 06:39:12
  • themadhare ~IJM 2012/06/12 03:42:53
    YES [explain why you think so].
    themadhare ~IJM
    +3
    The worst Attorney General since

    john mitchell
  • beachbum 2012/06/12 03:41:50
    YES [explain why you think so].
    beachbum
    +3
    Certainly appears that way...........good grief, Roger Clemons on trial for lying to congress? How much is that costing the taxpayers? DOJ has nothing better to do - go after someone for something like that, yet refuse Fast and Furious, illegal immigration, etc. What a joke.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/08/01 01:42:28

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals