Kavanaugh says Section 666 excludes gratuities for past official acts
Brett KavanaughSupreme Court justice writing the majority opinion, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Barrett
Kavanaugh says Section 666 does not criminalize gratuities given as tokens of appreciation after official acts.
“The question in this case is whether §666 also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities—for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos, or the like—that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
Was the Supreme Court right to exclude gratuities from Section 666, as Kavanaugh argues and Jackson disputes?
In Snyder v. United States, the Supreme Court held that federal anticorruption statute Section 666 prohibits bribes but not gratuities for past official acts. Brett Kavanaugh's majority stresses statutory structure, federalism and fair notice. Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent argues that the statute reaches corrupt rewards. Their disagreement concerns this statute's scope, not a general right for officials to accept gifts.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
The Court holds that Section 666 covers bribes but not gratuities for past acts. Jackson's dissent argues that corrupt rewards fall within the statute.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Kavanaugh says Section 666 prohibits bribes promised or given before an official act.
After the quotation
He says state and local governments often regulate gifts to their officials.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case examines the Court's decision to exclude gratuities from Section 666. Kavanaugh expressly argues that Section 666 does not criminalize gratuities and defends that exclusion.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseJackson says the Court elevates federalism concerns over Section 666's text
“The Court’s reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Kavanaugh says Section 666 excludes gratuities for past official acts
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/5784-kavanaugh-says-section-666-does-not-criminalize-gratuities
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Kavanaugh says Section 666 excludes gratuities for past official acts". First published: 2026-10-16. Last updated: 2026-10-16. https://disputeindex.com/events/5784-kavanaugh-says-section-666-does-not-criminalize-gratuities