Litson Asks Supreme Court to Hear Federal Bribery Case That Criminalizes Ordinary Campaign Fundraising

Litson PLLC has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court of the United States to review the conviction of political consultant Matthew Borges and to clarify when lawful campaign contributions may be treated as criminal bribes.

The petition raises a narrow constitutional question: when alleged bribery rests solely on campaign contributions, must the government prove an explicit quid pro quo, or may a conviction rest on inferred intent and ambiguous political conduct?

Mr. Borges was convicted of RICO conspiracy based largely on a public-official bribery theory applied to others, despite not being a public official and entering the events at issue only after the legislation in question had already passed. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the conviction without resolving whether any independent criminal predicate tied to Mr. Borges was legally valid.

The petition argues that jury instructions allowing conviction if an official merely “knew”a contribution was given “in return for” official action improperly criminalize routine political fundraising and violate the First Amendment.

“Campaign contributions do not become bribes through implication or inference,” said Alex Little, Managing Member Litson PLLC. “The First Amendment requires an explicit agreement, not speculation about political motives.”

The petition asks the Court to reaffirm its decision in McCormick v. United States and clarify confusion stemming from later cases that have blurred the line between corruption and protected political speech.

‍

Read the full petition below.

‍