The Supreme Court will decide whether former Virginia Gov. Robert F. McDonnell was rightly convicted of corruption for his efforts on behalf of a businessman who bestowed money and gifts on the governor and his family. But now, McDonnell’s lawyers are arguing the appeals court’s interpretation of what “official action” means sweeps too broadly and risks granting federal authorities too much leeway to go after “ordinary politics”.
Advertisement
In an emailed statement, McDonnell said he was grateful for the court’s decision.
McDonnell was found guilty of accepting of more than more than $170,000 in gifts and loans from wealthy businessman Jonnie R. Williams Sr.in exchange for helping promote Mr. Williams’s business interests.
McDonnell’s lawyers are trying to convince the court that the kind of “official action” federal law treats as corruption – and that a jury agreed McDonnell committed while governor – was no more than “routine political courtesies”, including activities such as “arranging meetings, asking questions, and attending events”. His wife, Maureen, also was convicted. Since then, the ex-governor has mounted a far-reaching campaign to get the justices to hear his case, winning support from Republican governors and former aides to GOP and Democratic presidents, as well as former federal and state attorneys general, civil rights activists and others. McDonnell, a Republican, has consistently said he did nothing unusual in exchange for the gifts.
Both, though, were allowed out on bond with their appeals pending.
The high court granted certiorari Friday and will only concern itself with what has become the main question of the case: Just what constitutes an official act when it comes to federal bribery law.
Prosecutors granted Williams immunity from prosecution, in exchange for his cooperation.
His conviction marked “the first time in our history that a public official has been convicted of corruption despite never agreeing to put a thumb on the scales of any government decision”, his lawyers say.
McDonnell’s attorneys had compiled an impressive list of supporters to tell the court that his appeal raised important issues. The McDonnells borrowed his lake house, his private jet, his posh golf club membership and his Ferrari.
The government replied that the law does not require a showing of “pressure”. “The failure of a bribery scheme does not make it lawful”.
“The court of appeals upheld petitioner’s convictions based on the unexceptionable proposition that a public official violates federal corruption statutes where, as here, he accepts personal benefits in exchange for his agreement to influence government matters”, the Justice Department said in urging the justices to turn down McDonnell’s petition for review.
Advertisement
The case is McDonnell v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 15-474.
