The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down part of a federal anti-corruption law that makes it a crime for state and local officials to take gifts valued at more than $5,000 from a donor who had previously been awarded lucrative contracts or other government benefits thanks to the efforts of the official.
By a 6-3 vote, the justices overturned the conviction of a former Indiana mayor who asked for and took a $13,000 payment from the owners of a local truck dealership after he helped them win $1.1 million in city contracts for the purchase of garbage trucks.
In ruling for the former mayor, the justices drew a distinction between bribery, which requires proof of an illegal deal, and a gratuity that can be a gift or a reward for a past favor. They said the officials may be charged and prosecuted for bribery, but not for taking money for past favors if there was no proof of an illicit deal.
Here’s a little corruption, as a treat!
Call it a tip.
I’m going to leave this bag of money on the floor, if it’s gone when I come back I won’t miss it.
Just be sure to declare it as found money on your taxes!
Oh my, 6-3, who ever could those 3 have been who didn’t want corruption?
Ya know, if 2016 was just a hair different we’d have seen 5-4 against such a ruling. But ya know, people were so upset about Hillary’s emails, or someone. Sigh.
Scratch one of orange Genghis Don’s campaign promises.
corrupt supreme court making it legal to bribe them? stinks
Who would have guessed the bribe takers are all for bribes…
It feels like they are trying to radicalize me.
Have you heard of project 2025?
Have you heard of project 2024 where Billionaire Republicans own all American politicians by bribing Democrats through AIPAC?
I’m not saying the system is rigged, but what’s a few million extra
briberylobbying dollars out of your corporate budget when it means that you can secure your goal of reduced government oversight? It’s not like you have to do this for any other political candidate than the Republican and Democratic nominees either, since you know news outlets will make sure to not platform and illigitimize any independent party that’s a threat to their own financial interests.
What the actual fuck?
seems like a good thread to plug https://represent.us
they describe themselves as
RepresentUs is America’s leading nonpartisan anti-corruption organization fighting to fix our broken and ineffective government. We unite people across the political spectrum to pass laws that hold corrupt politicians accountable, defeat special interests, and force the government to meet the needs of the American people.
here’s their policy platform https://represent.us/policy-platform/
they claim to have played a part in over 185 pieces of legislation (mostly at the state level) that contributed to their core platform https://represent.us/our-wins/
here are their ongoing campaigns presented state by state https://represent.us/2024-campaigns/
nobody and no organization are perfect but I feel like most people can find something to agree on here
What else do you expect from uncle Tom’s fishing trips?
“Nuh uh, you can’t prove it!”
What a fucking joke.
Illegitimate court. Not a single ruling from them should be upheld or paid attention to by any citizen. Over half of them have proven themselves to be corrupt BEYOND shame.
Unfortunately, despite the fact I agree with you this court is illegitimate, and would add our entire government is illegitimate due to the capitalist’s capture of it and legalization of their bribery of incoming officials, these illegitimate rulings will be enforced by our captured government at the point of a gun, and for this I blame the framers for failing to put any reasonable checks, including term limits, on the judicial branch.
Ok, sounds like the Supreme Court is just sorta all-in on institutional corruption. Got it.
Because they’d be the first to go if we cleaned up corruption. I can see them sitting there wondering about all their “gifts” and seeing the chance to dismantle any laws that would bring that into question.
Always has been
Why wouldn’t they be? Aren’t they the product of institutional corruption?
They’re a product of unrestrained Capitalism capturing its own government and accompanying regulators. This was the inevitable outcome of “turning the bull loose.”
Short term profit > the needs of the many and the long term habitability of this planet for all future humans.
Who cares about our species’ future? Bezos’ support mega yacht for his mega yacht needs a support support mega yacht to keep it company!
It’s yachts all the way down.
Buying politicians is super duper legal now, thanks to conservatives both past and present. May the super wealthy among us rejoice as the huddle masses work feverishly for their masters. The conservatives have done their part and restored the autocrats to their former power.
Did you really expect them to rule against their own economic interest?
At this point, it’s an unsolvable problem.
The only way to begin preventing lobbying interests from overtaking voter interests would be to have anti-lobbying politicians, and enough of them to actually get something done without being blocked by both the Democrats and Republicans. That would only happen after multiple decades of anti-lobbying presidents being elected, and that itself will never happen because the RNC and DNC are both paid off by corporate interests, so they’ll never nominate a candidate that goes against their masters. And, on top of that, it’s highly unlikely that a third-party candidate will ever succeed when they’re both illigitimized by the media and put in an extreme disadvantage by the electoral college.
“no proof of an illicit deal”
The money IS the proof of the illicit deal, they gave him money when there was no legal or reasonable reason to give him money.
“We wanted to just give away money” isn’t a legal reason for anyone who isn’t recording for a you tube channel at this point.
This was another case by the conservative law network where the facts were either made up, or so badly misrepresented that they might as well have been made up. This mayor basically walked into the company’s office and said, “I got you those contracts. Give me money if you want any more in the future.”
One of the clowns on this court is a corrupt fuckhead who has been accepting bribes from billionaires for years.
Do you have any idea how little that narrows it down?
But the SCOTUS already said money is free speech. This is exactly the natural progression of Republican corruption we expected.
So as near as I can tell, the Supreme Court’s goal is to create some vague illusion that corruption is not to be tolerated by making it a crime if and only if people with a specific interest in a specific ruling or piece of legislation offer a substantial amount of money or something of equivalent value while clearly communicating their intent to buy the influence of an official and said official then accepts the bribe, clearly announces their intent to act according to the bribe-payer’s wishes solely because they’ve been paid to, then does so.
And in literally ALL other cases, it somehow won’t count and will be entirely legal.
They have already decided money is speech, so this is a 1st amendment ruling?
Also an easy way to cover their asses for all the bribes they have taken.
Yes - it’s pretty much a given, cynically, that a corrupt court is going to rule that corruption is legal.
As I often do, I wonder if this is going to be one of the things that future historians will point to as a notable event in the days leading up to the collapse of the US.
