The Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned a federal corruption conviction of a former Indiana mayor, who won his challenge of a law that had ensnared him for accepting a gratuity while in office.
In a 6-3 ruling, the high court ruled in favor of James Snyder, a Republican and former mayor of Portage, Indiana.
The majority said that states and localities can set different standards for when an official can or can’t accept gratuities or gifts following an official act. But the court said it was wrong for the feds to charge and convict Mr. Snyder under federal law for accepting a gratuity as a state official.
“Not surprisingly, different governments draw lines in different places,” Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote for the majority. “Some prohibit gifts only from business entities currently doing business with the local government. Others restrict gifts from businesses bidding for government contracts. With respect to gratuities to state and local officials, many of those officials are part-time and are allowed to hold outside employment. That reality can create complications for regulating gifts to those officials, and the rules often reflect that reality.”
The case stemmed from the federal government, not local prosecutors, charging Mr. Snyder with wrongdoing after awarding two contracts to Great Lakes Peterbilt, a trash truck company. The city purchased five trucks for about $1.1 million in 2013.
In 2014, while Mr. Snyder was still mayor of Portage, the company gave him a $13,000 check. He said it was for consulting services, but the federal government alleged the payment was an illegal gratuity for the 2013 contract.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson and the other Democratic appointees dissented, saying Congress was concerned with state and local officials using their public positions for personal gain when it passed a law extending some public corruption safeguards to state and local offices.
In her dissent, she chastised the court’s Republican appointees for siding with Mr. Snyder.
“Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love,” Justice Jackson wrote. “The Court’s reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute and is a quintessential example of the tail wagging the dog.”
Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor joined Justice Jackson’s dissent.
Mr. Snyder was removed from office after his conviction. He has maintained his innocence.
The high court ruling comes as some of the GOP-appointed justices have been accused by liberal advocates of accepting gifts like luxury vacations and not properly disclosing them on financial filings, suggesting concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
The justices, specifically Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., have maintained there were no reporting requirements at the time and they have done nothing wrong.
According to The Associated Press, the high court’s ruling for Mr. Snyder tracks with prior decisions related to public corruption. In 2016, the court overturned the conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. And in 2010, it curbed an anti-fraud law used by prosecutors against ex-Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.