* I tried, I really did (OK, not that hard), but I just don’t get Snapchat…
As disgraced former governor Rod Blagojevich, federal inmate 40892-424, has his request for retrial considered by the Supreme Court today, the Rauner campaign launched a Snapchat filter to commemorate the occasion.
The filter allows users to take a selfie posing as Blagojevich and features his confidante JB Pritzker, the man caught on FBI wiretaps discussing potential appointments and donations surrouding the vacant Illinois U.S. Senate seat in 2008.
Pritzker has remained silent on the potential for his wiretap partner to receive another day in court.
* Here it is…
* Meanwhile, The Hill ran an interesting op-ed about the case…
So how did we get to this point? It’s because federal courts around the country are interpreting two Supreme Court decisions differently. In some areas, courts hearing corruption cases treat a campaign contribution like a gift to a lawmaker of a winter trip to a Florida beach. That’s both absurd and dangerous to free speech.
In the first of these two cases, the Supreme Court said that to find guilt for extorting a campaign contribution, the law requires “an explicit promise or undertaking by the official to perform or not to perform an official act.” But a year later another Supreme Court ruling in another corruption case created confusion.
Some courts read the second decision as watering down the “explicit promise” requirement. These courts, including the one that hosted the Blagojevich trial, allow conviction under a looser standard. A jury can convict if it infers an implied promise from the candidate’s awareness that the donor expects something in return for a campaign contribution.
*** UPDATE *** Interesting development…
* Related…
* SCOTUS reviewing Blagojevich’s appeal today: In their court filing last fall, Rod Blagojevich’s lawyers argued blurry lines between lawful and unlawful fundraising leave politicians vulnerable. A letter signed by nineteen Illinois lawmakers asks justices to review Blagojevich’s case– calling it an issue of national importance.
