Blagojevich amicus brief urges supreme court to hear case, Blagojevich SCOTUS appeal update January 18, 2016, Time to file response to petition extended twice, Brief amici curiae of current and former elected officials

Blagojevich amicus brief urges supreme court to hear case, Blagojevich SCOTUS appeal update January 18, 2016, Time to file response to petition extended twice, Brief amici curiae of current and former elected officials

Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

The US Supreme Court website reveals the following status of the Rod Blagojevich appeal:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docketfiles/15-664.htm

An amicus brief was filed on December 21, 2015 by attorney Alan R. Friedman on behalf of Current and Former Elected Officials, et al.

List of Amici Curiae:

Jan Schakowsky is an incumbent member of the
United States House of Representatives from Illinois.

Danny Davis is an incumbent member of the United
States House of Representatives from Illinois.

Mike Quigley is an incumbent member of the United
States House of Representatives from Illinois.

Bobby Rush is an incumbent member of the United
States House of Representatives from Illinois.

Bob Barr is a former United States Attorney
and a former member of the United States House of
Representatives from Georgia.

William Lipinski is a former member of the United
States House of Representatives from Illinois.

David Phelps is a former member of the United States
House of Representatives from Illinois.

Glenn Poshard is a former member of the United
States House of Representatives from Illinois and a
former President of Southern Illinois University.

Emil Jones is a former President of the Illinois
Senate and a former member of the Illinois House of
Representatives.

Carol Ronen is a former member of the Illinois Senate.
Skip Saviano, is a former member of the Illinois House
of Representatives. He is the current Village President
of Elmwood Park

Margaret Blackshere is a former President of the
Illinois AFL-CIO.

Edward M. Smith is a former Vice-President of
Laborers’ International Union of North America, Midwest
Region.

From the brief:

“Summary of Argument

Amici urge the Court to grant the writ on the first
question presented by Petitioner in order to address an
issue of national importance. Although amici take no
position on Mr. Blagojevich’s innocence or guilt on any
of the counts of conviction, they submit that this Court’s
guidance is needed to distinguish the lawful solicitation of
campaign contributions from criminal violations of federal
extortion, bribery, and fraud laws. In McCormick v. United
States, the Court acknowledged that—given the system
of private political campaign financing that has existed in
the United States since the nation’s inception—political
candidates and incumbents alike cannot realistically avoid
soliciting campaign funds from the very constituents whose
interests they may later advance through the support of
specific legislation or other official acts. 500 U.S. 257, 272
(1991). As a result, McCormick held that extortion based
on soliciting campaign contributions requires a quid pro
quo in the form of an “explicit promise or undertaking”
by a public official to perform or not perform an official
act. However, the Court’s subsequent decision in Evans v.
United States, 504 U.S. 255 (1992), has blurred the relative
clarity of McCormick’s holding.

Circuit courts have since struggled to determine
whether and how Evans modified McCormick’s holding
regarding extortion under color of official right, bribery,
and fraud in the solicitation of campaign contributions.2
Confusion in the lower courts is problematic for lawabiding
politicians and donors who wish to avoid prohibited
conduct and threatens to discourage candidates and
their supporters from legitimate campaign solicitation
and donation activities. It is particularly important in
the campaign contribution context—where contributors
generally assume that the supported candidate’s election
will benefit the contributor’s interests—that brightline
standards exist to guide prosecutors and juries to
avoid selective enforcement against unpopular political
candidates or donors. In addition, the Circuit Courts are
split on whether Evans applies to campaign contributions,
and this Court’s guidance is needed to restore national
uniformity to this area of the law.

Amici respectfully submit that it is important to
the effective operation of the nation’s political system
that the Court clarify the legal standard to distinguish
between the necessary, legitimate solicitation of
campaign contributions, on the one hand, and unlawful
extortion, bribery, and fraud, on the other. The Court’s
consideration of this issue is needed to guide individual
political candidates and donors who wish to confidently
and lawfully engage in campaign financing activities.”

http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Blagojevich_Amicus_Brief.pdf