Some worry a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling weakens federal public corruption law, passing the regulatory responsibility on to state and local governments.
In Snyder v. United States, the high court overturned the bribery conviction of a former Indiana mayor. The court's majority opinion along ideological lines said that federal law criminalizes bribes given before an official act, not rewards handed out after.
Retired federal public defender Alexander "Ali" Silvert talked to The Conversation about the ruling in light of high-profile public corruption cases in Hawaiʻi.
"Essentially, now you can meet with a politician, ask for some favorable legislation, walk away and then give gifts and money and gratuities later in appreciation for what the politician did," Silvert said.
He said the ruling could pressure state and local governments to pass and enforce tougher public corruption laws.
"We know from campaign finance reform legislation that the Legislature has been 100% against adopting strict rules against these kinds of gratuities. We know about that New York Times-Civil Beat article talking about these parties that were had in back rooms," he said.
"That is not criminal under state law, and that will remain not being criminal and remain being acceptable practices so long as our Legislature, now because that's the only people who can do it, doesn't enact some kind of meaningful reform in terms of campaign funding and campaign contribution," Silvert added.
Silvert previously represented Gerald Puana in the case that led to the conviction of former Honolulu Police Chief Louis Kealoha and former Honolulu Deputy Prosecutor Katherine Kealoha.
This interview aired on The Conversation on July 2, 2024. The Conversation airs weekdays at 11 a.m. on HPR-1.
