Matt: Yes, he'd want to make clear that his gratuity was for their 9-0 ruling in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC (2023), in which they held that choice-of-law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law.

In retrospect, Jack Smith should have just offered little goodie bags to the justices if they got on with the immunity decision

As I understand the jurisprudence you can reward corrupt acts *only* so long as you don't formalize the promise of a reward ahead of time, as an intended quid pro quo.

Yes, he'd want to make clear that his gratuity was for their 9-0 ruling in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC (2023), in which they held that choice-of-law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law.

Post