2nd SCOTUS ruling for the day, and the last for the day

[Harpy Eagle]

The opinion is 6-3 with the court holding that federal law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities for past acts.

So, it is ok to get a bribe, as long as you get it after you have done the favor. Cool!

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service

www.scotusblog.com

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The opinion is 6-3 with the court holding that federal law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities for past acts.

So, it is ok to get a bribe, as long as you get it after you have done the favor. Cool!

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service

www.scotusblog.com

They're talking about federal law. State law(s)?

 

[martybegan]

The opinion is 6-3 with the court holding that federal law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities for past acts.

So, it is ok to get a bribe, as long as you get it after you have done the favor. Cool!

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service

www.scotusblog.com

I think it means they defer to State laws on the matter.

 

[Crepitus]

The opinion is 6-3 with the court holding that federal law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities for past acts.

So, it is ok to get a bribe, as long as you get it after you have done the favor. Cool!

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service

www.scotusblog.com

Well it's katy bar the door now.

I've been wanting the city to approve some work on my property for a while now but it seems to be being held up for some reason.

I'm gonna go down to the planning department and let someone know there would be a suitable gratuity in it for them after the fact if they would approve the funding and such.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well it's katy bar the door now.

I've been wanting the city to approve some work on my property for a while now but it seems to be being held up for some reason.

I'm gonna go down to the planning department and let someone know there would be a suitable gratuity in it for them after the fact if they would approve the funding and such.

No reason not to

 

[TNHarley]

I cant disagree with them.

 

[TNHarley]

Well it's katy bar the door now.

I've been wanting the city to approve some work on my property for a while now but it seems to be being held up for some reason.

I'm gonna go down to the planning department and let someone know there would be a suitable gratuity in it for them after the fact if they would approve the funding and such.

Better check local and state laws first.

 

[JGalt]

The opinion is 6-3 with the court holding that federal law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities for past acts.

So, it is ok to get a bribe, as long as you get it after you have done the favor. Cool!

SCOTUSblog - Independent News & Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Devoted to covering the US Supreme Court comprehensively, without bias according to the highest journalistic standards as a public service

www.scotusblog.com

Sounds like they're setting us up for their presidential immunity decision.

 

[1srelluc]

Well it's katy bar the door now.

I've been wanting the city to approve some work on my property for a while now but it seems to be being held up for some reason.

I'm gonna go down to the planning department and let someone know there would be a suitable gratuity in it for them after the fact if they would approve the funding and such.

Like this isn't already known?