Supreme court rules on bribery

[Mike Honcho 5,270]

 

Quote

 

New York Times - 

The Supreme Court limited the sweep of a federal law on Wednesday aimed at public corruption, ruling that it did not apply to gifts and payments meant to reward actions taken by state and local officials.

The 6-to-3 ruling, which split along ideological lines, was the latest in a series of decisions cutting back federal anti-corruption laws.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for a conservative majority, said that the question in the case was whether federal law makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept such gratuities after the fact. He wrote, “The answer is no.”

The decision was issued as the court faces increased scrutiny over its ethics practices. After months of revelations by ProPublica and others that Justice Clarence Thomas had failed to reveal luxury travel and gifts from the Texas billionaire and conservative donor Harlan Crow, as well as revelations about other justices, the court adopted an ethics code, the first in its history.

The case before the court, Snyder v. United States, No. 23-108, concerned James Snyder, a former mayor of Portage, Ind., a city of about 38,000 people near Lake Michigan. In 2013, while Mr. Snyder was mayor, the city awarded two contracts for a garbage truck company, Great Lakes Peterbilt. Portage bought five garbage trucks for about $1.1 million.

In 2014, after the process was complete, the company cut Mr. Snyder a check for $13,000 for what he later said were consulting services.

The F.B.I. and federal prosecutors said the bidding process had been manipulated to ensure the company prevailed. Investigators said the money was a gratuity for the garbage truck contracts, but Mr. Snyder said it was payment for his consulting services as a contractor for Peterbilt.

A jury convicted Mr. Snyder of accepting an illegal gratuity, and a federal judge sentenced him to more than a year in prison. On appeal, Mr. Snyder argued that the federal statute criminalized only bribes, not after-the-fact gratuities. A federal appeals court affirmed his conviction, and Mr. Snyder petitioned the Supreme Court to review the case.

The majority explained that the law typically makes a distinction between bribes — payments made or agreed to before a government action to influence the outcome — and gratuities — payments made after a government action to reward or thank the public official.

Although bribes are frowned upon as inherently corrupt, the majority noted, federal, state and local governments have treated gratuities with more nuance.

In its reasoning, the conservative majority said it relied on statutory history and text, among other factors, to find that the federal statute focused on bribes, not gratuities.

Justice Kavanaugh wrote that such gifts to officials were often already regulated by state and local governments. The federal law, he wrote, “does not supplement those state and local rules by subjecting 19 million state and local officials to up to 10 years in federal prison for accepting even commonplace gratuities.”

While “American law generally treats bribes as inherently corrupt and unlawful,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote, gratuities are another matter. Some can be “problematic,” while others can be “commonplace and might be innocuous.”

He listed examples. A family tipping their mail carrier. Parents sending a gift basket to thank their child’s teacher at the end of the school year. A college dean giving a sweatshirt to a city council member who speaks at an event.

Those examples, he wrote, suggest that “gratuities after the official act are not the same as bribes before the official act,” adding that unlike gratuities, “bribes can corrupt the official act — meaning that the official takes the act for private gain, not for the public good.”

 

The 13K "gift" was negotiated down from 15K between Snyder and Peterbilt.   

[Engorgeous George 2,331]

Most cities and States except gratuities of de minimus value from being violations, but that is usually under $100 in vlaue or even undr $50.  $13,000 seems more than a polite thank you for your service.  To me it seems like thank you for violating your oath to server the people and instead working to enrich the payor.

 

Still, the ruling may be technically correct if not correct in practice.  It does not particularly concern me as itis a roadmap on how to write up proper legislation in the area.  Legislation which has been figured out by many, many municipalities and states which all foresaw this technical difficulty and avoided it.

[seafoam1 3,022]

 

 

[edjr 6,580]

10 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

 

Peterbilt.   

Isn't that Buttplugs nickname?

[Voltaire 5,316]

3 minutes ago, edjr said:

Isn't that Buttplugs nickname?

He was mayor two towns over.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

Dude WTF?  Sounds like BS, and more evidence of why we need to overhaul and Anti-Bribery Anti-Corruption laws and implement ethics reform.

[weepaws 3,191]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Dude WTF?  Sounds like BS, and more evidence of why we need to overhaul and Anti-Bribery Anti-Corruption laws and implement ethics reform.

So biden And his team need to go, I agree. 

[Nomad99 742]

We can't accept more than $49.99 or a gift of equivalent value.