October Term 2009 · Docket 08-876
Does the federal mail fraud statute cover bribery schemes?
The dispute centers on whether Section 1346 covers bribery or kickbacks.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Estrada argued the statute text is vague.
Mr. Dreeben noted the side that brought the case did not raise vagueness earlier.
Justice Sotomayor questioned the vagueness of bribery laws.
Justice Alito doubted the consistency of pre-McNally cases.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of the federal mail fraud statute. the sides that brought the case argue the law is vague. The government argues it clearly covers bribery.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 8, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to limit the statute's reach.
The government wants the Court to uphold the bribery conviction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the statute is unconstitutionally vague.
The government argues the statute clearly prohibits bribery.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked why the statute limits bribery.
Chief Justice Roberts questioned the definition of corporate opportunity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of federal fraud laws. It determines which business schemes face criminal prosecution. It clarifies the boundary between legal and illegal conduct.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-11 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-51 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-49
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.