Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Oliver L. North, 910 F.2d 843 (D.C. Cir. 1990).
· cites it 25× “After extensive pretrial proceedings and a twelve-week trial, North was convicted in May of 1989 on three counts: aiding and abetting an endeavor to obstruct Congress in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505 and 2 (“Count 6”); destroying, altering, or removing official NSC documents in…”
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982).
· cites it 6× “IV) and 18 U. S. C. § 1505 . [10] The court *806 found that genuine issues of disputed fact remained for resolution at trial.”
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982).
· cites it 11× “IV) and 18 U. S. C. § 1505 . The Air Force, however, has claimed that the underlying reorganization was undertaken to promote efficiency.”
United States v. Louis F. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543 (8th Cir. 2005).
· cites it 4× “The court further found that “defendant’s conduct as established at trial, which consisted of giving false statements to agents of the FBI and IRS knowing that they were conducting an investigation,” established a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505 . Application note 14 to § 2F1.”
United States v. Cisneros, 26 F. Supp. 2d 24 (D.D.C. 1998).
· cites it 18× “of separation of powers and the political question doctrine; (2) Cisneros’ motion to dismiss Counts 2-17 and a portion of Count 1 for failure to state an offense because Cisneros’ statements did not concern a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal department or agency; (3)…”
United States v. Sunia, 643 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2009).
· cites it 5× “Finally, Counts Five and Six charge Sunia and Lam Yuen, respectively, with obstruction of an agency proceeding in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505 . Id. ¶¶ 54-63 . The defendants filed their motion to dismiss various counts of the indictment in whole or in part on June 27, 2008.”
United States v. John M. Poindexter, 951 F.2d 369 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
· cites it 7× “§ 1505 , on the ground that the statute as written cannot constitutionally be applied to some of the conduct, specifically lying to or misleading the Congress, with which Poindexter is charged in those counts. On the other hand, we reject Poindexter’s argument that he cannot be…”
United States v. John C. Kelley, 36 F.3d 1118 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
· cites it 8× “§ 371 , and obstruction of justice, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505 and 1512. Kelley’s motion for acquittal, or, in the alternative, for a new trial, was denied by the district court and Kelley was sentenced to 43 months’ imprisonment followed by three years’ supervised…”
United States v. Atl. States Cast Iron Pipe Co., 612 F. Supp. 2d 453 (D.N.J. 2009).
· cites it 11× “§ 371 , with objectives of obstructing pending proceedings before OSHA [contrary to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505 and 1515(b) ], making materially false statements to OSHA [contrary to 18 U.”
United States v. Joseph Fischer, 64 F.4th 329 (D.C. Cir. 2023).
· cites it 4× “See 18 U.S.C. § 1505 (“Whoever . . . withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material .”
Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654 (1988).
· cites it 3× “[11] The Attorney General accordingly *667 requested appointment of an independent counsel to investigate whether Olson's March 10, 1983, testimony "regarding the completeness of [OLC's] response to the Judiciary Committee's request for OLC documents, and regarding his knowledge…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.