Breaking Down the Menendez Indictment with Dan Richman
Oct 31, 2023
auto_awesome
Legal expert Dan Richman discusses the indictment of Senator Bob Menendez, the implications of the Supreme Court case McDonnell v. United States on corruption prosecutions, the significance of gold bars in the case, wavering support for Menendez in New Jersey, and the complexities of proving corruption in federal crime charges.
The Supreme Court case McDonnell v. United States makes prosecuting corruption cases, like the one against Menendez, significantly more difficult.
The addition of FARA charges in the indictment allows the government to delve into specific relationships and interactions between Menendez and the Egyptian government, potentially complicating the case further.
Deep dives
Overview of the Menendez indictment
The podcast discusses the federal charges against Senator Bob Menendez related to an alleged bribery scheme involving the government of Egypt. The indictment accuses Menendez and his wife of committing various favors for the Egyptian government in exchange for money, gold bars, and other benefits. The photos of gold bars included in the indictment are particularly striking, although the legality of giving gold bars is not the main issue in the case. It highlights Menendez's past legal troubles and the potential impact of the Supreme Court case McDonald v. United States on prosecuting corruption cases. The podcast raises questions about the definition of 'official acts' and how McDonald's stricter standards for proving a quid pro quo might affect the government's case against Menendez.
The importance of official acts
The podcast examines the question of whether the conduct described in the Menendez indictment rises to the level of 'official acts' as defined by the McDonald case. It points out that while Menendez himself may not have directly committed official acts, the indictment alleges that he pressured others to do so. The second circuit's interpretation of McDonald is likely to play a significant role in determining whether the government's case stands. The podcast also highlights the significance of Menendez's role as the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and how it relates to the definition of official acts. It raises concerns about the complexity and messiness of the case, especially if classified information becomes a factor.
The interaction with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)
The podcast explores the addition of FARA charges in a superseding indictment and how they interact with the other charges against Menendez. The inclusion of FARA charges allows the government to delve into specific relationships between Menendez and the Egyptian government. It opens the door for extensive proof of interactions and potentially avoids dealing with issues of classified information. The podcast suggests that the FARA charges could complicate the case further, leading to a potentially lengthy and drawn-out trial. It also notes that FARA provides a separate tool for the government to address interactions between government officials and foreign powers.
The implications of the McDonald case and the state of corruption prosecutions
The podcast reflects on the McDonald case and its impact on corruption prosecutions, particularly those involving political figures and official acts. It notes that the Supreme Court's recent decisions, including McDonald, may have made it more difficult to prosecute political corruption cases. The podcast highlights the complexity and uncertainty surrounding the interpretation of McDonald, and how it could affect the outcome of the Menendez case. It discusses the broader trend of constraining federal prosecutors in corruption cases and the challenges they face in proving quid pro quo agreements that satisfy the stricter standards set by the Supreme Court.
It’s been a rough few months for Senator Bob Menendez. The powerful New Jersey Democrat has pleaded not guilty to federal charges related to an alleged bribery scheme under which, according to prosecutors, Menendez carried out favors for the government of Egypt.
But while the allegations set out in the indictment sound pretty unsavory, recent decisions by the Supreme Court—in particular, the 2016 case McDonnell v. United States—make prosecuting such corruption cases significantly more difficult. Lawfare recently published an article about the potential impact of McDonnell on the Menendez case by Daniel Richman, the Paul J. Kellner Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. Lawfare Senior Editor Quinta Jurecic sat down with Dan to discuss McDonnell, the charges against Menendez, and, of course, the photographs of gold bars allegedly given to Menendez that federal prosecutors included in the indictment.
