Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

former9thward

(32,006 posts)
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:46 AM Apr 2016

Supreme Court justices seem skeptical of McDonnell’s conviction

Source: Washington Post

Supreme Court justices on Wednesday seemed prepared to overturn the 2014 corruption conviction of former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell and perhaps make it harder for prosecutors to bring charges against politicians who provide favors for their benefactors.

Justices on both sides of the ideological divide expressed concern about federal corruption laws that could criminalize what they variously called “routine” or “everyday” actions that politicians perform for campaign contributors or supporters who have provided them with gifts.

“For better or for worse, it puts at risk behavior that is common,” said Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who along with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. suggested that the federal corruption laws are so vague that they might be unconstitutional.

Roberts also noted a brief filed on McDonnell’s behalf by former White House counsels to the past five presidents, including President Obama, that said upholding McDonnell’s conviction would “cripple the ability of elected officials to fulfill their role in our representative democracy.”

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/gifts-and-politics-supreme-court-to-hear-sides-in-former-virginia-governors-case/2016/04/27/1483fb88-0bf5-11e6-a6b6-2e6de3695b0e_story.html

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court justices seem skeptical of McDonnell’s conviction (Original Post) former9thward Apr 2016 OP
it puts at risk behavior that is common AlbertCat Apr 2016 #1
Would their decision affect Don Siegelman? still_one Apr 2016 #2
Maybe he should get on the docket. This is just a Repub trick for getting 4-4 ties on cheesy cases. mpcamb Apr 2016 #9
I believe he is due to be released next year so I doubt it will impact his case much. nt cstanleytech Apr 2016 #11
Rove should be thrown in jail for that garbage still_one Apr 2016 #13
I agree however that is not the current issue under discussion. nt cstanleytech Apr 2016 #16
Perfect setup for completing the delivery of USA to the corporations. NCjack Apr 2016 #3
Is this all about Antonin Scalia perdita9 Apr 2016 #4
Speeding and pot laws also criminalize "routine" or "everyday" actions Democat Apr 2016 #5
Will the USSC reverse Don Siegelman? no_hypocrisy Apr 2016 #6
Didn't they refuse Siegleman's case which is not even close MattP Apr 2016 #7
Impeach the bastards! curiouso Apr 2016 #18
Make the acceptance of gifts illegal for all public employees WHEN CRABS ROAR Apr 2016 #8
Exactly. Heck, if they are illegal moonscape Apr 2016 #19
They are justifying their accepted "expenses paid by" Arizona Roadrunner Apr 2016 #10
"Favors, routine, everyday actions" sulphurdunn Apr 2016 #12
Oh, crap. I was thinking with the great conflict of interest poster boy Scalia gone, that the JudyM Apr 2016 #14
Key word: our: "... in our(i.e., U.S., corrupt) representative democracy ..." eom Festivito Apr 2016 #15
Hey whats.........a little thing called a bribe, whats so ............ turbinetree Apr 2016 #17
 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
1. it puts at risk behavior that is common
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:51 AM
Apr 2016

Good behavior that is common or bad behavior that is common?

What are they talking about?

mpcamb

(2,870 posts)
9. Maybe he should get on the docket. This is just a Repub trick for getting 4-4 ties on cheesy cases.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:18 PM
Apr 2016

McDonnell and his wife are guilty as hell. The worst outcome of his case gaining a tie vote is how it stretches the rule of what's acceptable for public office. There can always be some reason someone gives you money and more and more,there's no penalty for malfeasance.

NCjack

(10,279 posts)
3. Perfect setup for completing the delivery of USA to the corporations.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:59 AM
Apr 2016

Lloyd Blankfein and his political recipients are dancing with joy. We will no longer be allowed to strike politicians with our crutches while they rob us.

Democat

(11,617 posts)
5. Speeding and pot laws also criminalize "routine" or "everyday" actions
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:01 PM
Apr 2016

I doubt the Supreme Court is going to help you or me out of speeding ticket.

curiouso

(57 posts)
18. Impeach the bastards!
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:57 PM
Apr 2016

Can private citizens initiate impeachment proceedings - or at very least recall - against members of the Supreme Court who are willing to let Siegelman rot in jail but think Mcdonnell got a raw deal?

moonscape

(4,673 posts)
19. Exactly. Heck, if they are illegal
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 06:24 PM
Apr 2016

in many (most?) health care facilities from concern of favoritism, certainly we could allow our government employees to have an ethical standard that would rise to that of nursing homes ...

 

Arizona Roadrunner

(168 posts)
10. They are justifying their accepted "expenses paid by"
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:21 PM
Apr 2016

Hey have you read about all of the trips the members of the Supreme Court take that are paid for by some vested interest? Wonder how much of their reactions will be due to their own "outlook" vs. what the general public accepts as "bribes" etc.?

 

sulphurdunn

(6,891 posts)
12. "Favors, routine, everyday actions"
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 12:37 PM
Apr 2016

“cripple the ability of elected officials to fulfill their role in our representative democracy.”

It's all OK unless you're willing to call it bribery, but calling it what it is would fill our prisons with politicians.

JudyM

(29,248 posts)
14. Oh, crap. I was thinking with the great conflict of interest poster boy Scalia gone, that the
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 01:14 PM
Apr 2016

Supremes would take a look at what's happened since Citizens United and try to rein it in with this case.

Damn!!!!!

turbinetree

(24,701 posts)
17. Hey whats.........a little thing called a bribe, whats so ............
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 03:32 PM
Apr 2016

wrong giving a 20,000 dollar watch, pay for a wedding, asking for some favors on the side about getting vitamins, it just fine and dandy------------------wink------------- wink.

Hell, lets all go to the Koch, Pope, Aldelson, Devos, ect... get together's or any other get together's from both parties and see what happening, in the world of the ALEC class for example, of how to have one form of justice for the peons and another form of justice for the wealthy professional class-----------------that's the ticket.
The peoples federal government is just over reaching when it comes to bribery and fraud---------------damn.

"Justices on both sides of the ideological divide expressed concern about federal corruption laws that could criminalize what they variously called “routine” or “everyday” actions that politicians perform for campaign contributors or supporters who have provided them with gifts. "

"Roberts also noted a brief filed on McDonnell’s behalf by former White House counsels to the past five presidents, including President Obama, that said upholding McDonnell’s conviction would “cripple the ability of elected officials to fulfill their role in our representative democracy.”

Lets look at how to make bribery easier -------------------A----OK, give me a 20,000 dollar watch----------------wink, wink, because it may "cripple representative democracy", what a bunch of horse-

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court justices se...