Supreme Court legalizes bribery when you do it right

[struggle4progress]

This Snyder ruling is the final piece of evidence I need that this Court can’t be saved.
By Charles P. Pierce
PUBLISHED: JUN 26, 2024 7:35 PM EDT

... In Snyder v. United States, the carefully manufactured conservative majority maintained its unshakable fealty to corporate oligarchy by completing the work of legalizing bribery that began with the decision in Citizens United. The decision, written and delivered by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, is a clumsy work of intellectual gymnastics and an equally clumsy attempt by the majority to pretend that it lives in a land beyond all human frailty. That there are at least two justices in the majority who have dogs in this fight makes Snyder the final bit of evidence that this Supreme Court is irredeemably corrupt ...

Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion contains ideas that can stand proudly in line with Justice Anthony Kennedy’s immortal “We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption” from Citizens United. He drew a distinction between “bribes” and “gratuities” that must seem absurd to the ghosts of long-dead Chicago aldermen and Massachusetts state representatives ...

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a61429425/snyder-supreme-court-ruling/

[struggle4progress]

1. The Supreme Court just legalized bribery

JUN 26, 2024
Conservative justices, swimming in gifts from billionaire benefactors, just ruled that corruption is perfectly legal.

Katya Schwenk

... The court’s conservative supermajority ruled 6-3 in Snyder v. United States, overturning the 2019 corruption conviction of an Indiana mayor who pocketed $13,000 from a local business tycoon after ensuring the company got a major town contract. The justices ruled that such bribes were not against the law ...

“It’s shocking, but it’s not surprising that the court came out that way,” said Kedric Payne, vice president at the legal advocacy group Campaign Legal Center. The decision, he said, “makes it harder to go after public corruption — and that’s been the trend of the court for quite some time now” ...

Section 666, the bribery law in the case, is a major federal anti-corruption statute, an important tool for white-collar crime prosecutors trying to hold politicians and powerful actors accountable. It’s “the strongest law,” Payne said, for prosecutors trying to go after corruption in cases like Snyder’s ...

In the Snyder case, prosecutors argued the mayor rigged the town procurement process to award two contracts, together worth $1.1 million, to a local garbage truck company. Within weeks, a company executive wrote Snyder a check for $13,000. The executive later testified that the mayor, who was struggling financially at the time, had demanded the money ...

https://www.levernews.com/the-supreme-court-just-legalized-bribery/

[Mad_Machine76]

2. They literally don't understand

how bribery works.......

Or they do and are just trying to be "cute"

[delisen]

7. They & Federalist Society intend to totally corrupt our government

This will enable the Federalist Society or any billionaire or groups to pay rewards or so-called tips to any office holder as a “thank you” gesture. An officeholder could receive immense payments this way and be totally beholden to private interests. It privatizes public offices-everything from school boards to Supreme Court to Congress and Executive branch.

It is I think no coincidence that earlier this month that Donald Trump floated the idea that wages paid in tips should not be taxed -which means the recipient will not need to report tips as income. I wonder if he had advance information about this decision or if there is a third party insider advising both these politicized justices and Trump.

Justice Kavanaugh was a hardcore political activist and worked for Ken Starr against Bill Clinton. His first judicial appointment was held up in Congress for three years due to fears about his partisan background.

In this opinion he tries to downplay the bribery issue by comparing it to receiving a gift card. He is feigning innocence.

I think this is a cynical, deliberate, anti-democracy opinion and we need to expose it, and fight it.

[struggle4progress]

10. They know exactly what they're doing

[Irish_Dem]

11. They perfectly understand they are legalizing bribery.

Their goal is to create a corrupt government system which works only for the rich.

[struggle4progress]

3. Supreme Court's bribe enthusiasts make bribery easier

There is basically no form of political corruption that the conservative justices won’t find a way to excuse.
BY MADIBA K. DENNIE
JUNE 26, 2024

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices have been plagued by nonstop coverage of ethics scandals for the past year: luxury Alaskan fishing adventures with a billionaire who later had business before the Court, secret quarter-million dollar loan forgiveness for luxury RVs, exotic escapades to Indonesia and other freebies on Harlan Crowe’s dime, and so on. According to research conducted by Fix the Court, over the past two decades, Supreme Court justices have accepted hundreds of gifts that are together worth up to $6.6 million, led by Justice Clarence Thomas, who has personally accounted for about $5.9 million of that total all by himself.

As questions swirled around about the justices’ integrity, the Court took up another case about the proper interpretation of federal bribery laws. Today, the Court issued its ruling Snyder v. United States and seized the opportunity to make its stance on corruption clear: Corruption is okay, actually.

Federal law makes it a crime for government officials to “corruptly” accept payments while “intending to be influenced or rewarded” in connection with business involving $5,000 or more. James Snyder, the former mayor of Portage, Indiana, was convicted under that law for rigging an ostensibly public bidding process for a million-dollar contract, and then telling the winners that he needed $15,000 to pay off his tax debt and cover his holiday expenses. The company ultimately cut Snyder a check for $13,000, and its controller testified at trial that they were paying for an “inside track.” Snyder later claimed the money was for “consulting;” when asked, his answers changed about what he was supposed to have been “consulting” for ...

https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/snyder-v-us-supreme-court-opinion-recap-we-love-bribes-so-much/

[struggle4progress]

4. Tipping culture out of control.

MARCIE JONES
JUN 26, 2024

... The case is Snyder vs. US:

This case involves James Snyder, who is the former mayor of Portage, Indiana. In 2013, while Snyder was mayor, Portage awarded two contracts to a local truck company, Great Lakes Peterbilt, and ultimately purchased five trash trucks from the company for about $1.1 million. In 2014, Peterbilt cut a $13,000 check to Snyder. The FBI and federal prosecutors suspected that the payment was a gratuity for the City’s trash truck contracts. But Snyder said that the payment was for his consulting services as a contractor for Peterbilt. A federal jury ultimately convicted Snyder of accepting an illegal gratuity in violation of §666(a)(1)(B). The District Court sentenced Snyder to 1 year and 9 months in prison. On appeal, Snyder argued that §666 criminalizes only bribes, not gratuities. The Seventh Circuit affirmed Snyder’s conviction.

But in a 6-3 decision (guess which six, just guess!), beer-lover Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority that it’s only really bribery if someone shows up with a bag of cash with a dollar sign on it and both parties recite at the same time, “this is a bribe.” But a post-dated check, why, that’s just a sparkling gratuity! Wrote he:

“The question in this case is whether §666 also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities—for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos, or the like—that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no” ...

https://www.wonkette.com/p/supreme-court-it-aint-bribery-if

[bluestarone]

5. Because of such a muddy confusing decision,

I'd say the door is WIDE open fo this kinda bullshit. Today;s courts seem to want cause mass confusion, rather than PLAIN yes or no on these stupid decisions.

[Mad_Machine76]

9. +1000

I'd tip you for this comment if I could LOL

[The Magistrate]

6. Let Me Pour One Out For All Our Old Alderman Who Insisted On Cash Up Front For The Zoning Variance

They'd have never known jail had they just had the wit to do it on the cuff....

[Poiuyt]

8. Campaign contributions from lobbyists is nothing short of bribery too

and that's been going on for a long time.