Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 183 FSUPP2D 1145 - United States v. Sabri

United States v. Sabri’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
April 2003
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 18 U.S.C. § 666 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 23 U.S.C. § 158

Relies on Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America · United States v. Lopez · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · McNally v. United States · New York v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) Whoever, if the circumstance described in subsection (b) of this section exists- (2) corruptly gives, offers, or agrees to give anything of value to any person, with intent to influence or reward an agent of an organization or of a State, local or Indian tribal government, or any agency thereof, in connection with any business, transaction, or series of transactions of such organization, government, or agency involving anything of value of $5,000 or more; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. (b) The circumstance referred to in subsection (a) of this section is that the organization, government, or agency receives, in any one year period, benefits in excess of $10,000 under a Federal program involving a grant, contract, subsidy, loan, guarantee, insurance, or other form of Federal assistance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In enacting § 666, [ ] Congress did not contract with states or local governments. Neither did Congress bestow gifts of funds upon those governments. Rather, Congress passed a federal criminal statute designed to punish conduct that falls within the domain of traditional state concerns (bribery, embezzlement, fraud, etc.). Section 666 reaches beyond punishment of the state and local governments who receive those funds to proscribe the conduct of third persons who aren’t parties to the funding contract. Spending Clause power is not that broad.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Section 666 was adopted pursuant to Congress' spending power, Art. I, § 8, cl. 1. We have held that the spending power requires, at least, that the exercise of federal power be related ‘to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs.’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.