Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-108_8n5a.pdf
Page Number: 23

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

1 

JACKSON, J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 23–108 
_________________ 

JAMES E. SNYDER, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT 

[June 26, 2024] 

JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and 

JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. 

Officials  who  use  their  public  positions  for  private  gain
threaten  the  integrity  of  our  most  important  institutions. 
Greed  makes  governments—at  every  level—less  respon-
sive, less efficient, and less trustworthy from the perspec-
tive of the communities they serve.  Perhaps realizing this, 
Congress  used  “expansive,  unqualified  language”  in  18
U. S. C. §666 to criminalize graft involving state, local, and 
tribal entities, as well as other organizations receiving fed-
eral funds.  Salinas v. United States, 522 U. S. 52, 56 (1997). 
Section 666 imposes federal criminal penalties on agents of 
those entities who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to ac-
cept  payments  “intending  to  be  influenced  or  rewarded.” 
§666(a)(1)(B).

Today’s case involves one such person.  James Snyder, a 
former Indiana mayor, was convicted by a jury of violating 
§666 after he steered more than $1 million in city contracts
to  a  local  truck  dealership,  which  turned  around  and  cut 
him a $13,000 check.  He asks us to decide whether the lan-
guage  of  §666  criminalizes  both  bribes  and  gratuities,  or 
just bribes.  And he says the answer matters because bribes 
require an upfront agreement to take official actions for pay-
ment,  and  he  never  agreed  beforehand  to  be  paid  the
$13,000 from the dealership.

Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one