The Supreme Court on Wednesday casts some doubt on hundreds

criminal charges and convictions

arising from the Jan. 6 mob attack on the U.S. Capitol, including one of the charges

in treatment

against former President Trump.

A lot of

defendants who broke into the Capitol were charged under a law that makes it a crime to “corruptly obstruct an official proceeding….”

Prosecutors said the crowd tried to prevent Congress from certifying the election of current President Biden

as president

.

This provision was part of a law passed in 2002 after the collapse of Enron in a financial scandal, and concerns the destruction of documents or records.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear the Jan. 6 appeal of one of the defendants, whose lawyers argue he did not violate the law in question because he did not attempt to destroy documents or evidence.

Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer, said he arrived late to the attack on the Capitol and was in the building for only four minutes.

He has not yet been tried, but judges agreed to hear his legal appeal, in which he argued that the 2002 obstruction law did not apply to him.

Trump has also been charged with violating the 2002 law, although he also faces other charges.

It is the second time this week that the justices agreed to consider legal claims related to the ongoing case against Trump arising from the Jan. 6 attack.

The justices said they will consider quickly ruling on Trump’s claim that he is immune from criminal prosecution for his actions as president.

It is not clear whether the new case will evolve quickly. If the judges hear the case this spring, they probably won’t rule until June.