Supreme Court Deals Blow to Jan. 6 Defendant

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear arguments from a January 6 rioter that a law preventing demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol violates the First Amendment.

John Nassif, who was sentenced in August 2022 to seven months in prison for his role in the event at the Capitol Building, argued that the site belonged to the American people and therefore he had a right to express himself there.

Attorneys for Nassif argued that he entered the Capitol about an hour after the building was first breached and stayed for only 10 minutes, entering the Rotunda but going no further. They argued that the protest on January 6, 2021, was peaceable and happened in a place that was publicly accessible, which the First Amendment allows for.

Nassif, from Florida, was charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building, violent entry and disorderly conduct in a Capitol Building, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol Building, with his argument over his First Amendment rights attached to the latter.

"The validity of a law that criminally prohibits such expression anywhere is a question of great importance," a July filing read. "Here, where the law bans that expression in the publicly accessible buildings that make up the seat of our representative government, the importance is monumental."

The filing likened the events of Jan. 6 to other major lobbying moments, such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lewis taking "their iconic walk to make their demands heard before the 1963 March on Washington."

However, statute has made it clear that protesting inside the Capitol has been criminalized, with Nassif pointing out that a college student wearing a Black Lives Matter T-shirt in the Capitol Visitor Center could be arrested and serve jail time under the same rules used against him.

The law used—U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G)—prohibits parading, demonstrating or picketing in the U.S. Capitol Building and its connected areas, punishable with a fine or up to six months in prison.

Responding to Nassif's petition, the U.S. Department of Justice said that the interior of the U.S. Capitol was not a public forum and that this meant First Amendment rights were limited.

The government also argued that lower courts had made it clear that the law being used against Nassif and other Jan. 6 defendants was not overreaching. The government said the Supreme Court should therefore deny the defendant's request for a hearing.

On Tuesday, the court sided with the government and denied Nassif the chance for a hearing.

The ruling comes amid uncertainty over the future of Jan. 6 prosecutions, which President-elect Donald Trump has hinted he would end while also looking at pardoning those convicted.

Last week, another defendant warned a judge not to hold his trial before Trump takes office, saying there could be "a dangerous cycle of escalating retribution."