In a recent ruling, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that individuals present in the Capitol during the January 6th riot can be convicted even if they were passively observing. The court stated that perpetrators did not need to exhibit "disorderly" or "disruptive" behavior to be found guilty of disorderly conduct. The definitions of these terms have become more concrete over time, as their interpretation depends on the surrounding circumstances.

The court emphasized that whether an act qualifies as disorderly is determined by considering the specific context in which it takes place. It highlighted that even passive, quiet, and nonviolent conduct can still be considered disorderly based on previous court rulings. To illustrate this point, the court used a metaphor comparing the trespassers in the Capitol on January 6th to hikers and audience members.

This ruling comes after an appeal on the conviction of Russell Alford, one of the defendants from the January 6th incident. Alford argued that he was merely a passive observer who did not actively participate in the chaos. However, the court upheld the conviction, stating that Alford's presence in the Capitol contributed to the multi-hour delay in the electoral certification process, and thus, his actions were deemed disruptive. The jury had ample evidence to conclude that Alford knowingly entered the Capitol without authorization.

As a result of his conviction, Alford has been sentenced to twelve months' incarceration. The ruling has significant implications for other defendants involved in the Capitol riot, clarifying that passive observation alone can lead to charges of disorderly conduct. The court's decision reinforces the importance of considering the circumstances surrounding an act when determining its potential to incite a breach of the peace.

This ruling sets a precedent and may impact future cases related to the January 6th riot. The court's position highlights the gravity of the events that unfolded on that day and underscores the need to hold all individuals present accountable for their actions, regardless of their level of direct involvement.