The Supreme Court, amid an unprecedented legality crisis related to unreported gifts to judges, debated Monday whether a contractor tipping a politician $13,000 is akin to taking a teacher to the Cheesecake Factory.
In 2012, James Sinder was elected mayor of the northwest Indiana city of just under 38,000. Synder, who was struggling to keep his own business and was behind taxes, oversaw the bidding process for a contract to purchase new garbage trucks for the city. The contract, worth more than $1.1 million, went to a local company and the latest round of paperwork was inked. A month later, in January 2014, Great Lakes Peterbilt Truck Company, sent Snyder $13,000 for what he later claimed were consulting services.
In 2019, Synder found his second term cut short when a federal jury he was convicted of bribery. Although he appealed and was granted a new trial, the former mayor was convicted again in March 2021 and sentenced to 21 months in prison.
The case found its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to review an appeals court ruling that upheld the former Portage mayor's 2021 conviction — turning the small-time corruption case into a national issue that has the potential to legitimize companies that reward public officials in exchange for lucrative government favors.
The Supreme Court has consistently worked to narrow the definition of corruption, but the timing of the case and its subject matter are interesting: Over the past year, the court has faced unprecedented scrutiny over revelations that judges received and failed to disclose lavish gifts.
As The Lever recently noted, high-profile corruption cases in other states have been put on hold as prosecutors wait to see how the Supreme Court rules Snyder v. United States.
On Monday, in a hearing filled with hypothetical Cheesecake Factory meals, gift baskets and Starbucks gift cards, the justices appeared poised to side with the convicted Indiana mayor.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh said the facts of that case were great for the government, but he was hesitant to subject 19 million state and local officials to the law, which has been on the books for decades.
Justice Elena Kagan intervened, supporting his statement. “This statute applies not only to government officials, but to almost every major institution in America,” he said, describing an example of a billionaire hospital patient who was given preferential treatment in hopes of receiving a large donation.
The “problem is that the word 'corruptly' then creates enormous uncertainty and ambiguity about where the line is drawn,” Kavanaugh argued. “You don't know if the concert tickets, the game tickets, the Starbucks gift card, whatever, where the line is, and so there's ambiguity.”
“Hint, how does anyone in the real world know the line?” Judge Neil Gorsuch spoke for Colleen Sinzdak, the attorney who supported the government. “Leave aside the billionaires and the hospitals. You deal with little gifts with teachers, doctors, police officers, all the time.”
Gorsuch, seemingly unable to tell the difference between a slice of peanut butter fudge and a $13,000 gift, continued to offer hypotheticals. “How does this statute give fair notice to anybody in the world—and I hate to do it, but I'm going to do it—the difference between the Cheese House [sic]…” he said, as Judge Amy Coney Barrett broke in to tease, “Inn at Little Washington.”
“And the inn in Little Washington. Thank you, thank you,” Gorsuch responded. “How does anyone know?”
As the justices expanded on the semantics, Sinzdak said, “What you're all talking about are these fringe cases,” adding that those cases would be “really hard for the government to show consciousness of wrongdoing.”
Later, Sinzdak explained: “I guess I'm not including here the kind of apple for teacher and hypothetical theories that you see in the petitioner's brief. It's just not even on the radar as far as the government is concerned. What we're looking for is, again, corruptly accepting a payment for the purpose of a reward in connection with business or transactions worth at least $5,000.''
from our partners at https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-justices-bribes-cheesecake-factory-1235005132/
