The question
Whether 18 U.S.C. Section 666 makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities given as a reward after an official act, or whether it reaches only bribes.
Snyder v. United States
What the Court decided
The Court reversed the Seventh Circuit and held that 18 U.S.C. Section 666 does not criminalize a state or local official accepting a gratuity for a past official act. The statute proscribes bribes, which are payments agreed to before an official act to influence it, but it does not reach after-the-fact rewards. The Court rested on six considerations taken together: text, statutory history, statutory structure, statutory punishments, federalism, and fair notice. James Snyder's conviction for accepting an illegal gratuity was reversed and the case remanded.
How the justices split
6-3The Court's opinion
Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett
Section 666 is a bribery statute, not a gratuities statute. Its text closely tracks the federal bribery provision in Section 201(b) and bears little resemblance to the gratuities provision in Section 201(c). Statutory history shows Congress amended Section 666 two years after enactment to model it on the bribery statute. Reading it to cover gratuities would create sentencing disparities, would infringe on state and local authority to regulate gifts to their own officials, and would leave 19 million state and local officials guessing which gratuities are lawful. The term 'rewarded' fixes the timing of the corrupt agreement, not the timing of payment, and does not convert the statute into a gratuities ban.
Concurring
Gorsuch, writing alone
Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion. The syllabus notes the opinion but does not state its reasoning.
Dissenting
Jackson, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan
Jackson filed a dissenting opinion joined by Sotomayor and Kagan. The syllabus notes the dissent but does not state its reasoning.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
Section 666 proscribes bribes to state and local officials but does not make it a crime for those officials to accept gratuities for their past acts.
Source: syllabus, Held
The Court reversed and remanded the Seventh Circuit's judgment at 71 F. 4th 555.
Source: syllabus, Held
Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Barrett.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Jackson filed a dissenting opinion joined by Sotomayor and Kagan; Gorsuch filed a concurring opinion.
Source: syllabus, lineup
The Court relied on six considerations taken together: text, statutory history, statutory structure, statutory punishments, federalism, and fair notice.
Source: syllabus, Held