Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> long as you get the gift after you have done the deed, it's just a gift, isn't that the ruling?

What ruling?

Generally, no, accepting gifts in exchange for official actions is illegal (and punished) irrespective of whether payment is made up front or in arrears [1].

[1] https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-senator-robert-menen...

View on HN

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-108_8n5a.pdf is I believe what they're referencing. And it definitely muddied the water.

Agree. But it doesn’t solely condition corruption on the timing of the payment. (We’ll have to see how it works in practice. McDonnell was similarly criticised, but wound up being much less impactful in practice [1].)

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_v._United_States

Oh yea, I agree. It's a twist, but not a get-out-of-corruption-free card.

That case doesn’t muddy the water, because it doesn’t address the requirements of bribery law at all. In the trial below, the prosecutors disavowed that they were proceeding on a bribery theory. The jury was never instructed about the required elements of bribery.

The only thing the Supreme Court decided in that case was whether that specific statute encompasses a gratuity theory. That’s illegal for federal officials under a different statute that was not invoked in this case.

The most recent supreme court ruling from a few weeks ago dramatically narrowed the Federal bribery laws;

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-limits-scop...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com