Federal circuit courts are split on a core question of corruption law: whether state and local officials, and agents of organizations that contract with or receive benefits from the federal government, may lawfully accept gratuities.

It is generally a federal crime for state and local officials to act in their official capacities in exchange for things of value, provided they solicit or agree to accept such benefits “corruptly.”  This is quid pro quo bribery, prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 666.  Federal courts lack consensus, however, on whether § 666 also criminalizes scenarios wherein an official or agent of a federal program recipient acts without expectation of a thing of value, but later receives a “gratuity” to reward his or her conduct.

The Supreme Court will review the issue this term in Snyder v. United States.  The case concerns an Indiana mayor who was convicted under § 666 for accepting a $13,000 payment from a truck company that had recently won a sizeable contract with the city.

Although the merits of this case involve money given to an elected official, the statute also applies to agents of organizations that receive, in any one-year period, more than $10,000 in federal benefits, whether in the form of a contract award, grant, loan, appropriation, or other structure.  This includes a sizeable number of companies, institutions of higher education, and nonprofit organizations.  As a result, if the Supreme Court holds that § 666 criminalizes gratuities and broadly interprets the statutory standard for “corruptly” accepting things of value, covered entities may have limited capacity to receive gifts, even those unrelated to the principal’s use of federal funds.

The Supreme Court’s decision could also have significant implications for individuals, companies, and organizations that offer items or services of value to the covered officials and entities, since any gift can be scrutinized as a possible inducement or reward for exercising official powers.

This area of law spans civil and criminal provisions at the federal and state levels, and parties engaging on related matters should consider consulting with counsel.  Covington will continue to monitor developments in this space, and the firm is well positioned to assist companies and individuals navigating this area of the law.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Peter Koski Peter Koski

Drawing on his experience as a senior DOJ official and leading international anti-corruption practitioner, Peter Koski represents companies and individuals in sensitive, high-stakes government and regulatory enforcement matters and internal investigations.

Peter has a depth of experience investigating, bringing to trial, and handling…

Drawing on his experience as a senior DOJ official and leading international anti-corruption practitioner, Peter Koski represents companies and individuals in sensitive, high-stakes government and regulatory enforcement matters and internal investigations.

Peter has a depth of experience investigating, bringing to trial, and handling on appeal complex white collar matters involving the public and private sectors. He has handled an array of matters relating to foreign and domestic corruption, business and human rights, supply chain sourcing, cyber security, and violations of the federal laws governing elected and appointed officials. He has particular experience defending clients against alleged violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), and the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), as well as conspiracy, honest services fraud, bribery, gratuities, money laundering, obstruction of justice, and conflicts of interest.

Prior to joining the firm, Peter served as Deputy Chief of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section, where he helped manage a team of over 30 attorneys responsible for investigating and prosecuting corruption across the country. In this capacity, he also argued complex constitutional issues before the federal courts of appeal. In over a decade of service in the Justice Department, Peter partnered with numerous U.S. Attorney’s Offices and worked closely with senior officials at over 25 federal agencies. Peter has tried over two dozen bench and jury trials, appeared in court in over a dozen districts across the country, and has handled corruption matters on five continents.

While in the U.S. Government and at Covington, Peter has worked closely with multilateral organizations, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). His previous experience with the OECD included serving as the U.S. representative on the Anti-Corruption Network Law Enforcement Advisory Board and the Advisory Group for the Anti-Corruption Network for Eastern Europe and Central Asia Thematic Review on Criminalization of Corruption.

Relying on this experience, Peter works with clients to develop effective due diligence programs related to sourcing and supply chains. He also analyzes the impact of regulator activity in this space, and develops strategies for engaging directly with regulators and NGOs. In this capacity, he helps companies assess the impact of Withhold Release Orders and counsels clients on the statutory regimes related to human rights and global supply chain issues.

Photo of Samuel Klein Samuel Klein

Samuel Klein helps clients realize their policy objectives, manage reputational risks, and navigate the regulatory environment governing political engagement.

As a member of Covington’s Election and Political Law practice, Sam assists clients facing Congressional investigations and offers guidance on ethics laws; with the…

Samuel Klein helps clients realize their policy objectives, manage reputational risks, and navigate the regulatory environment governing political engagement.

As a member of Covington’s Election and Political Law practice, Sam assists clients facing Congressional investigations and offers guidance on ethics laws; with the firm’s Public Policy group, Sam supports strategic advocacy across a breadth of policy domains at the federal, state, and local levels.

Sam spent one year as a law clerk at the Federal Election Commission. His prior experience includes serving as an intern to two senior members of Congress and helping clients communicate nuanced policy concepts to lawmakers and stakeholders as a public-affairs consultant.