The Supreme Court’s conservatives appeared skeptical Tuesday of the way federal prosecutors have deployed a felony charge devised in the aftermath of the 20-year-old Enron financial scandal against about 350 rioters convicted or accused of storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

However, after nearly two hours of argument on the subject, it remained unclear whether the justices had a consensus on how to narrow the interpretation of the law, which prohibits obstructing congressional proceedings. It seemed possible that the court could settle on a view of the law that would preserve the vast majority of the cases the Justice Department filed that used the obstruction statute to level a serious felony charge at a Jan. 6 defendant. ...

“Would a heckler in today’s audience qualify, or at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify, and for 20 years in prison?” Justice Neil Gorsuch asked, citing the maximum sentence available under the obstruction provision. He appeared to refer to an episode last year when Rep. Jamal Bowmaan (D-N.Y.) pulled a fire alarm in a Capitol office building, causing an evacuation during a government funding vote. He later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge.