The Supreme Court on Wednesday sided with the former mayor of an Indiana city accused of accepting a bribe in exchange for a towing contract, the latest decision in which the high court has weakened federal anti-corruption laws.
James Snyder, the former mayor of Portage, Indiana, was convicted of accepting $13,000 from a trucking company weeks after it was awarded a contract. Snyder argued the payment was an after-the-fact “gratuity” that wasn’t covered by the federal bribery statute.
The ruling was 6-3 on conservative-liberal ideological lines.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in the majority opinion, said that if the appeal were accepted, it would “radically upend gratuities rules and turn (the law) into a vague and unfair trap for 19 million state and local officials.”
Related Articles
Supreme Court allows White House to press social media companies to remove disinformation
Calls for reproductive rights in LA on anniversary of Roe v. Wade overturn
Supreme Court to decide whether states can restrict gender-affirming care for minors
Is Trump shielded from criminal charges as an ex-president? A nation awaits word from Supreme Court
What’s left for the Supreme Court to decide? Here’s the list.
During oral arguments in April, the justices wrestled with how the law might apply to more common exchanges – say, a wealthy patient who donates a large sum to a hospital where she received exceptional care. Several of the justices were concerned about federal prosecutors using the anti-bribery law to criminalize more benign payments.
The law at issue makes it a federal crime for local officials to “corruptly” take anything valued at over $5,000. Part of the challenge of the case was setting a standard for how to define “corruptly.”
In a series of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has adopted a narrow interpretations of federal anti-corruption laws. Last year, the court tossed out fraud convictions in two cases involving former aides of then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.