Chris Geidner: The final SCOTUS decision today is Snyder v. US. Kavanaugh has the court's 6-3 decision on ideological grounds, holding that the Section 666 bribery statute does not apply to "gratuities" given for public officials' *past* acts. Jackson writes the liberals' dissent.

It's a one-box day at SCOTUS, meaning we are expecting one or two decisions. Subscribe to Law Dork now: www.lawdork.com

Law Dork | Chris Geidner | Substackwww.lawdork.com The Supreme Court, law, politics, and more. Click to read Law Dork, by Chris Geidner, a Substack publication with tens of thousands of subscribers.

The first, but not last, decision is in Murthy v. Missouri. Barrett has the 6-3 decision, reversing the 5th Circuit and holding that the plaintiffs lack standing in the case against Biden admin's social media outreach. Alito dissents, w Thomas & Gorsuch. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...

www.supremecourt.gov

The final SCOTUS decision today is Snyder v. US. Kavanaugh has the court's 6-3 decision on ideological grounds, holding that the Section 666 bribery statute does not apply to "gratuities" given for public officials' *past* acts. Jackson writes the liberals' dissent.

Here is the Snyder decision: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...

www.supremecourt.gov

Jackson, spitting fire: "Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love." Of federalism concerns: "[W]oulds, coulds, and shoulds of this nature must be addressed across the street with Congress, not in the pages of the U. S. Reports."

Gorsuch, with a rule of lenity concurrence.

With that, 11 decisions remain. The next SCOTUS decisions are expected at 10a Thursday. For now, subscribe to Law Dork: www.lawdork.com

Law Dork | Chris Geidner | Substackwww.lawdork.com The Supreme Court, law, politics, and more. Click to read Law Dork, by Chris Geidner, a Substack publication with tens of thousands of subscribers.

Here's my report out of SCOTUS today — including the unexpected EMTALA case development (or not): www.lawdork.com/p/emtala-doc...

Errant SCOTUS abortion case document posting sparks confusionwww.lawdork.com The was no ruling in the EMTALA case on Wednesday, but Bloomberg reported on an "inadvertently" posted doc. Also: SCOTUS conservatives make corruption easier.

bsky.app/profile/mdaw...

that extra big tip for the bartender is to show appreciation for them serving my first drink, and surely is not intended to influence my future service

Gorsuch is so fucking weird.

"we really just love and respect criminal defendants so much here on the conservative majority"

Just wish that they would apply this equally. Seems to be awfully one-sided with this court in how they apply this.

Lenity for me, but not for thee

Named after the infamously lax treatment of comedian Lenity Bruce.

Lenity for all but truck drivers who are freezing to death.

Now do chevaron

Looking at this case, holy shit. The city councilman basically embezzled a million dollars and gave it to some guy's truck dealership. The truck dealers then gave him a cheque thanking him for embezzling the million dollars. And the supreme court just said "yeah that's fine"

Am I missing something or is that just legalizing kickbacks?

you’re not missing anything

You just can't prenegotiate the kickback (yet).

Seems like you could certainly sign a “consulting” contract in advance as long as you don’t spell out it’s contingent on the official act. Loving all this freedom!

Well they didn’t give him the $13k BEFORE he sent them the contract

They affirmed Snyder?!?!?! The only thing missing was a memo line saying “bribery”

Sooooo if you pay the bribe after the law is signed, you're in the clear?

Pretty much apparently

How convenient for the bribers to be sure to get what they want before having to pay.

YEP, like what does this ruling say if there was literal communication about doing this? All fine and dandy? So fucking dumb

quo pro quid, clarice

They pay them off in Pounds Sterling??

This Court really, really loves bribes huh?

Gotta keep that gravy train running! Only for the right wing justices, of course

Love that "Don't forget to tip your Justice" is now the law of the land. Wonderfully corrupt system we've got here.

The Corruption Court rides again

RE: "Bribes" vs. "Gratuities"

A central tenet of conservatism has long been the need to engage in corruption when one wants. At least since Nixon’s misconduct promoted anti corruption legislation, conservatives have been tirelessly to erode it.

They mistake it for savvy. They think other people aren’t clever enough to crime while other people actually don’t do crime because it’s wrong and bad for society. Then they get butt hurt when they get caught and prosecuted.

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” — Frank Wilhoit, crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/l...

The travesty of liberalismcrookedtimber.org More in the suddenly topical vein of ‘who will rid us of those troublesome leftists’ from Sean Wilentz. For Chait, the problem is “It’s obvious to me why conservatives want everyb…

They aren't hypocrites any more, I'll give them that.

Oh, they've been walking back the anti bribery laws for quite some time.

So, the lesson here is: If you want to legally bribe a public official, you have to wait until AFTER they've delivered their side of the deal. #SCOTUScorruption

Aka extortion?

Chief Justice saying he's cool with all the money flowing to conservative justices from right-wing billionaires. Hard for him to say much, since major law firms are literally putting money in his pocket via his wife.

Quo Pro Quids are great!

the supreme court has decided that the supreme court has done nothing wrong. luxury gift packages to the left

Jesus. This is going to get exploited so badly. What a decision.

Take that, swamp! Feel the drain!

That's a devil of a statute

Tit for tat: Don’t do that Tat for tit: Go for it

Sooo....

retroactive bribery. "Criminal" or not, its entirely within lawmakers remit to make it *unethical*

Trump promises no tax on bribes.

666...truly the devil's decision.

So if I lay Clarence Thomas a billion dollars to vote for trans rights then it’s okay!

Post