![](../../../../images/scourt2.gif)
Basim
Omar Sabri v. U.S.
Are federal anti-bribery laws a
valid exercise of congressional power? Decided May 17
Scene one: businessman Basim Sabri bribes a Minneapolis city
councilman to grease the wheels for a development deal. Scene two: Basim is
busted under 18 USC 666, which makes the bribery of officials who receive
federal funds a federal offense. Scene three: Basim develops an interest in
federalism, and argues that 666 fails to make a connection between federal funds
and alleged bribes. (Not a specious point: appellate courts have split, in
this context, over the need for a nexus between forbidden conduct and federal
funding.)
End of act: Justice Souter, for a unanimous court, rules that
666 is well within Congress' powers. Despite an interesting objection from
Justice Thomas (who would validate 666 on commerce clause grounds), the Justices
agreed that Congress' spending power, coupled with the necessary and proper
clause, is sufficient to criminalize local monkey business. The feds may
"see to it that taxpayer dollars...are in fact spent for the general
welfare, and not frittered away in graft..."
opinion
here
back
to main page