Will the Supreme Court Make Bribery Even Easier?

The high court’s campaign to provide cover to the quid pro quo arrangement of corrupt politicians seems set to continue.

If you want to see the dire state of American anti-corruption efforts, look no further than the Supreme Court’s docket. No fewer than three state and local officials are begging the justices to overturn their criminal convictions for various corruption-related offenses. Joining some of their pleas are three public-corruption defendants who had their cases tossed by the justices as well.

At issue here is whether otherwise lawful campaign donations to a candidate can amount to quid pro quo bribery. Prosecutors and juries in these cases answered that question in the affirmative, as did the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Supreme Court may opt to use one or all of the cases to further bulldoze the government’s ability to police corruption among public officials.

All three of the active petitioners are Ohio officials—two of whom were participants in the Ohio nuclear bribery scandal a few years ago, and one who was convicted of more pedestrian corruption charges. We’ll start with the boring one since it is more helpfully illustrative of the unsavory dynamic that these officials want to protect.

Prior to his legal troubles, P.G. Sittenfeld served on the Cincinnati City Council in the late 2010s and hoped to run for mayor. In September 2018, according to court records, he told local real-estate developer—and, unbeknownst to Sittenfeld, FBI informant—Chinedum Ndukwe that he wanted a $10,000 campaign donation. “The majority of developers in Cincinnati,” he told Ndukwe at one point, “[are] going to be giving [me] ten grand.”

In further conversations, Sittenfeld appeared to suggest that his support for a redevelopment project would be tied to campaign contributions from Ndukwe and his allies. The FBI recorded the conversation and it later became part of the criminal charges against him. The most relevant portion is below (emphasis mine):

Sittenfeld: Just so, just so you know like, look I have, you know I, I love what you do as someone revitalizing our city creating jobs. I am fond of you as a friend. I also have like you know obligations to do the things I need to do to be a successful candidate so.Ndukwe: Absolutely.Sittenfeld: So, but what that means is I don’t really get like, if if you say look I don’t want to support you in the name of Chinedum Ndukwe, but some guy I’ve never met from Columbus is going to use a coup, you know, you know [your] network are going to a, round up a bunch of LLC checks. Like that’s great. I actually don’t care. But I mean the one thing I will say is like, you know I mean, you don’t want me to like be like ‘hey Chin like love you but can’t’ you know like, you know, I mean like, you know like. I, I, I want people to support me, that’s like … Ndukwe: Absolutely.Sittenfeld: … if a candidate doesn’t want people to support them, they’re a shitty dumb candidate …Ndukwe: Yeah, right, yeah, right.Sittenfeld: … and you know I’ve been [unintelligible] a lot of people have come through in a really big way that’s been awesome so far and I would love, I would love for you to be one of those people too.

Sittenfeld: Just so, just so you know like, look I have, you know I, I love what you do as someone revitalizing our city creating jobs. I am fond of you as a friend. I also have like you know obligations to do the things I need to do to be a successful candidate so.

Sittenfeld: So, but what that means is I don’t really get like, if if you say look I don’t want to support you in the name of Chinedum Ndukwe, but some guy I’ve never met from Columbus is going to use a coup, you know, you know [your] network are going to a, round up a bunch of LLC checks. Like that’s great. I actually don’t care. But I mean the one thing I will say is like, you know I mean, you don’t want me to like be like ‘hey Chin like love you but can’t’ you know like, you know, I mean like, you know like. I, I, I want people to support me, that’s like …

Sittenfeld: … if a candidate doesn’t want people to support them, they’re a shitty dumb candidate …

Ndukwe: Yeah, right, yeah, right.

Sittenfeld: … and you know I’ve been [unintelligible] a lot of people have come through in a really big way that’s been awesome so far and I would love, I would love for you to be one of those people too.

Note how cagey and indirect Sittenfeld became at this point. Prosecutors interpreted the “hey Chin, like, love you but can’t” statement to mean that if Ndukwe did not provide the requisite donations from himself and his associates, he would be unable to get Sittenfeld’s support on the city council on future redevelopment projects. Ndukwe himself testified at trial that he thought it “was very clear that if I donated, he was going to support and be supportive in my efforts, and if I didn’t, he wasn’t going to be supportive.”

In a later conversation, Ndukwe pressed Sittenfeld on his support for a redevelopment project known as 435 Elm, saying that he and his allies wanted to know that “it’s gonna be a yes vote, you know, without, without a doubt.” Sittenfeld’s answer was open to interpretation. “I mean, obv—as you know, obviously nothing can be illegal, like—illegally nothing can be a quid, quid pro quo,” he replied. “And I know that’s not what you’re saying either. But what I can say is that I’m always super pro-development and revitalization of especially our urban........

© New Republic