Justice #Kavanaugh, writing for a #conservative majority, said that the question in the case was whether federal #law makes it a #crime for state & local ofcls to accept such gratuities after the fact. He wrote, “The answer is no.”
Federal prosecutors’ interpretation of the law created traps for public officials, leaving them to guess what gifts were allowed, he added. If they guessed wrong, the opinion continued, the ofcls could face up to a decade in prison.
The decision reflected a sharp divide on the court, w/ Justice #KetanjiBrownJackson, joined by Justices Elena #Kagan & Sonia #Sotomayor, dissenting. While the #conservative wing asserted that the ruling gave discretion to state & local governments & protected ofcls from having to guess whether their behavior had crossed a #criminal line….
“Ofcls who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions. #Greed makes govts —at every level — less responsive, less efficient & less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve,” Justice Jackson wrote.
In what appeared to be a dig at #SCOTUS’ conservative bloc, Jackson added that the defendant in the case offered an “absurd & atextual reading of the statute” that “only today’s court could love.”
@Nonilex
Or, and hear me out,maybe they should accept gifts from anyone that did business with them while they were in office. And I for sure would reject cash, if I were in their shoes.
@Nonilex Guess #kavanaugh wrote it because he hasn’t (yet) been publicly outed for taking bribes and gifts. Well, besides finding out who paid off his massive mortgages and credit card debt, and…, and…,….
@Nonilex Public officials must not be accepting bribes or gratuities or any payment from those who deal with government. Payment before or after is corruption.