Supreme Court redefines political corruption, overturns McDonnell conviction

Will the Supreme Court's definition of "political corruption" make it harder to keep politicians honest? Will it make it easier for Hillary to avoid prosecution?

Gov Bob McDonnell caricature by DonkeyHotey for Creative Commons

WASHINGTON, July 27, 2016 – In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has overturned the conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, who was found guilty of violating law when he accepted money and loans from Jonnie R. Williams, CEO of Star Scientific.

The Supreme Court made its decision based on defining “official action” and how it is used in corruption convictions.

Chief Justice Roberts defined “official action” by saying, “It’s a decision or action on a ‘question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy,'” and added, “Setting up a meeting, talking to another official, or organizing an event (or agreeing to do so) — without more — does not fit that definition of an official act.”

Selling influence: Bob McDonnell’s defense is everybody does it

In 2014, McDonnell was found guilty on 11 counts of conspiracy after accepting more than $165,000 in gifts and loans from Star Scientific in exchange for promoting its new vitamin supplement. Early last year, McDonnell was sentenced to two years in a minimum-security prison, while his wife was sentenced to one year.

While his actions may seem distasteful and inappropriate, the justices ruled that this is nothing more than regular politics. The bottom line is letting your state down, and inappropriate behavior is not illegal. The court’s decision now makes it extremely hard to convict politicians on public corruption charges without solid evidence.

This decision will impact the case against Sen. Bob Menendez, who was indicted on corruption charges last spring, stemming from allegations that he traded deals for more than $750,000 in campaign donations from Florida eye doctor Salomon Melgen.

Because of the Supreme Court, Menendez can be found guilty only if there is something in writing stating that he was making the deal for contributions from Melgen.

Roberts’ decision also calls into question the conviction of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted of trying to sell the Senate seat that was held by President Obama. If there is no “smoking gun” in the form of paperwork, Blagojevich’s conviction could be overturned.

This decision could also convince politicians to make deals while skirting the laws and avoiding “official action” in order to make those deals without being thrown in jail.

This ruling also possibly protects Hillary Clinton and her foundation’s deals with foreign leaders.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.