The Supreme Court on Friday sharply narrowed the Justice Department’s use of a key federal charge against roughly 250 people pending trial or convicted as part of the pro-Donald Trump mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, potentially overturning their convictions and shortening some of their sentences.

The high court ruled 6-3 that prosecutors could not apply a federal statute that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct or impede an official proceeding to interfere in this case with Congress’s joint session to confirm Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory. The court ruled that the law applied only to tampering or destruction of evidence such as records or documents.

Trump also faces the charge as part of the federal criminal case brought against him by special counsel Jack Smith for allegedly seeking to subvert the results of the election, including by submitting fake slates from several key swing states.

What happens next?

As many as 250 defendants who have been convicted or still pending trial on the charge of obstructing an official proceeding could be affected by the decision, and potentially seek to vacate their convictions, sentences or plea deals, but most may not benefit much because they are convicted of other felonies or have completed their sentences. Outcomes will vary greatly depending on their individual circumstances.

Prosecutors had earlier maintained that even if the high court tossed out their use of the statute in Jan. 6 cases, only 27 defendants are likely to immediately see a meaningful reduction in prison time — made up of those who are not accused or convicted of other felonies such as assaulting police officers, and those who have begun but not yet completed serving their sentences. Another 110 defendants await trial or sentencing, a fraction of whom face no other felonies and could similarly benefit. (See more below.)

Will charges against Trump survive?

Although Trump’s name was not mentioned during oral argument, two of the four election obstruction and conspiracy counts he faces in his federal indictment in Washington, D.C., are based in part on allegations that he schemed with others to submit to Congress slates of phony electors from swing states and to get lawmakers to toss out lawful ballots on Jan. 6, 2021.

The special counsel prosecuting Trump’s case told the high court that the charges should still be valid against Trump regardless of how the Supreme Court ruled for Jan. 6 participants. They argued that is because Trump is alleged to have corruptly interfered with evidence in the form of electoral vote certificates that were to be counted by Vice President Mike Pence.

Prosecutors could still go forward with two other federal counts against Trump, accusing him of conspiring to defraud the United States and to violate the civil rights of Americans to have their legal votes counted by allegedly plotting to overturn the election’s legitimate results.

Will the vast majority Jan. 6 convictions stand?

Yes. About 80 percent of cases don’t involve the charge rejected by the high court.

By the numbers: more than 1,400 people have been federally charged in connection with the deadly Jan. 6 attack, including about 517 charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding police, and 137 who allegedly used weapons such as pipes and flagpoles or caused serious bodily injury, according to the Justice Department. About 1,050 have pleaded or been found guilty at trial, a third for felonies and two-thirds for misdemeanors such as trespassing in the restricted Capitol building or on its grounds.

By comparison, roughly 250 of that total face the obstruction of an official proceeding charge. About 110 of those defendants await trial or sentencing and might benefit from greater leverage in plea talks or by a lower sentence now that the Supreme Court has ruled. Prosecutors expect judges will hew close to average sentences to date — about two years in prison for defendants not convicted of another felony, and roughly four years for those guilty of additional felonies, but that remains to be seen.

That last group does not include the typically longer sentences handed down to for members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers extremist groups convicted of seditious conspiracy.

Was the Justice Dept. prosecution of the Capitol breach unfair?

In the eyes of the Supreme Court, prosecutors unlawfully stretched a statute aimed at criminalizing the obstruction of proceedings through evidence tampering to apply to allegedly corrupt efforts to stop Congress from certifying the legitimate results of the 2020 election. The court’s point was not that riot participant’s actions were right or justified, but that when the government charges a person with a crime, their alleged acts have to fit the exact text of a crime on the books, or else Congress has to pass a new crime.

Many judges who considered the question before it reached the high court disagreed, of course, and prosecutors argued that the “catchall” obstruction statute best fit a historically unprecedented and unforeseen event, in which some individuals violently stormed a building intending wrongfully to block an official proceeding. Such conduct is worse than misdemeanor offense, they reasoned, likening such action to storming the Supreme Court and forcing the evacuation of justices to prevent them from deciding a case.

So which Jan. 6 defendants may benefit from this decision?

Of roughly 140 obstruction defendants who have been sentenced, 80 were convicted of additional felonies such as assaulting police, rioting or destroying property. Prosecutors are expected to ask judges to stand by sentences in those cases. But about 60 face no other felony charge, and could benefit from resentencing for misdemeanors punishable by up to only 6 to 12 months incarceration.

Prosecutors estimate the number who could be released from prison in the near term could be roughly 27, or 2 percent of total cases charged. Another couple dozen similarly situated defendants who have completed their sentences could ask judges to vacate their felony conviction, while a handful have gained release pending appeal.

Some of those already ordered released pending appeal include Kevin Seefried, a Delaware man who carried a Confederate flag into the Capitol; Alexander Sheppard, of Ohio, who overran police lines and became one of the first rioters to enter the Capitol; and Thomas B. Adams, Jr., who entered the just-evacuated Senate chamber with a Trump flag as a cape. Each was ordered to be released after serving about one third of their respective three-year, 19-month and 14-month sentences, and none was convicted of any other felony.

Who will decide and how long will it take?

Defense attorneys say that while defendants can file motions to vacate their sentences or convictions, each case will be decided by a court after an individualized assessment of the possible risks and benefits of bringing their case back before a judge.

Overall, the vast majority of cases will require resentencing, even if only a smaller number actually receive less time from judges. Defense experts expect scores of sentences to be reargued through at least the end of 2024, regardless of how many prevail, starting with people who are currently locked up, before moving to look at whether convictions should be vacated or not.

Prosecutors and defense lawyers caution that judges often sentence defendants based on their overall conduct admitted in pleas or proven at trial, and might not change their calculus even if a count is dropped.

Prosecutors could ask judges to stack shorter sentences for misdemeanor offenses such as trespassing or disorderly conduct at the Capitol, rather than let them run concurrently, as usually happens, to match the average 24-month sentence that obstruction defendants have received in Jan. 6 cases. In cases where defendants back out of plea deals, prosecutors could threaten to bring new or revive dropped counts.