My understanding of the issue is that the prosecutor chose to use the CFAA rather than going after the real crime because of the circumstances. The accused in

My understanding of the issue is that the prosecutor chose to use the CFAA rather than going after the real crime because of the circumstances. The accused in the case was caught in a sting operation. The police created a fake situation where they pretended to have an undercover agent, and tries to see if the accused would interfere with the case. He did. The prosecutor however did not charge the accused over obstruction of justice, but rather CFAA and hacking charges. I would guess that the reason is that the prosecutor thought it was easier than charging someone with interfering with a fake case. From what I understand, courts and judges do not like it when either side try to be clever. CFAA is not a tool to be used when the prosecutor want to avoid a more difficult case, and so it needed to be limited in scope.