DC Circuit allows trespassing charge used to prosecute more than 1,400 Jan. 6 defendants
Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin rides a horse on 5th Avenue in New York City on May 1, 2020. (Photo by Jeenah Moon/Getty Images)
Prosecutors don’t have to show that a Jan. 6, 2021, trespassing defendant was aware that the U.S. Capitol grounds were restricted because of the presence of then-Vice President Mike Pence, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
The federal trespassing charge at issue has been used in the prosecutions of more than 1,400 Jan. 6 defendants, Politico reports. About 95% of the Capitol riot defendants were charged under the law, according to Reuters.
The federal law bans unauthorized members of the public from entering safety zones that protect people guarded by the Secret Service.
The defendant, Couy Griffin, is the founder of Cowboys for Trump. He led a group of Capitol protesters in prayer, according to briefs cited by Law.com. He was convicted for knowingly entering a restricted building or grounds.
Griffin had argued that he did not “knowingly” violate the law because there was no showing that he knew that the area was restricted because of the presence of Pence, a Secret Service protectee. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit disagreed in a 2-1 decision.
“We hold that knowingly breaching the restricted area suffices, even without knowing the basis of the restriction—here, the presence of Vice President Pence at the Capitol on Jan. 6,” wrote Judge Cornelia Pillard for the majority.
Pillard is an appointee of former President Barack Obama. Judge Gregory Katsas, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, dissented.
The majority’s interpretation “ensnares a hotel guest who walks past an ‘area closed for private event’ sign in search of an open bar if, unbeknownst to the thirsty interloper, the first lady is expected to attend,” Katsas said. “Likewise, it ensnares an individual who stepped over temporary plastic fencing just outside the Capitol grounds on Jan. 5, 2021, to save a few steps on a walk home from work, even if he was unaware of the impending arrival of the vice president.”
The U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to agree to hear the case given Katsas’ dissent, according to Politico.
