Court narrows scope of federal bribery law used to charge former speaker, ‘ComEd Four’
By HANNAH MEISEL | Capitol News Illinois
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday narrowed the scope of a federal bribery law prosecutors have relied on in their cases against former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and several of his allies convicted of bribing him.
A jury last spring found those allies – former lobbyists and executives for electric utility Commonwealth Edison – guilty on all counts, while a judge earlier this year pushed Madigan’s trial to October in order to wait for the high court’s decision on the federal bribery statute.
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled that the federal bribery statute – referred to as “Section 666” – does not criminalize “gratuities” given to a state or local public official after he or she has already performed an official act.
The high court’s decision narrowing the scope of Section 666 only to bribes, which require a quid pro quo, bolsters defense arguments made during last spring’s ComEd case.
Prosecutors alleged the utility bribed Madigan with jobs and contracts for the speaker’s allies in exchange for favorable legislation in Springfield. But attorneys for the “ComEd Four” argued the utility’s legislative wins were due to a multi-year strategic campaign, including spending big to contract with some of Springfield’s most influential lobbyists.
An attorney for close Madigan confidant Mike McClain, a longtime Springfield lobbyist who is a defendant in both bribery cases, predicted Wednesday that the ComEd case will have to be retried.
“We will be asking the court to vacate the conviction at a minimum,” attorney Patrick Cotter told Capitol News Illinois.
As for the case in which McClain is a co-defendant with Madigan, Cotter said his legal team would likely challenge the charges that rely on the federal bribery statute and may make other arguments, including that the grand jury indicted Madigan and McClain under an “incorrect” law.
Read more here.