Ketanji Brown Jackson
Role at the time: Supreme Court justice dissenting, joined by Sotomayor and Kagan
Condemned
Statement summary
Jackson says the Court elevates federalism concerns she calls nonexistent over the statute's text.
“The Court’s reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute”
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Supreme Court opinions in Snyder v. United StatesMajority printed page 1; Jackson dissent printed pages 1-2
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)Why we used this label
The case concerns the Court's decision to exclude gratuities from Section 666. Jackson rejects that decision and argues that it overrides Congress's text and intent.