## Facts

- Chicago maintained formal, nonpolitical, merit-based rules for hiring and promotion in nonpolicymaking city jobs.
- Federal prosecutors alleged that certain city employees and officials ran a political-patronage scheme from roughly 1993 to 2005.
- Favored applicants with political sponsorship allegedly obtained jobs and promotions through sham interviews and falsified hiring paperwork.
- The defendants were charged with mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341) and honest-services fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1346), on the theory that they deprived the City and the public of the intangible right to honest services.
- A federal jury convicted the petitioners, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
- The petitioners sought Supreme Court review challenging the scope and constitutionality of § 1346.

## Issues

1. Whether honest-services mail-fraud convictions of state or local officials require proof of a fiduciary duty rooted in state law.
2. Whether such convictions require proof that the defendant intended private gain for himself or co-schemers.
3. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1346 is unconstitutionally vague.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari.
- The Court issued no merits ruling on the meaning or constitutionality of § 1346, and the Seventh Circuit’s judgment remained in effect.
- Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Thomas and joined in part by Justice Ginsburg, dissented from the denial of certiorari, arguing the Court should have reviewed the case.

## Legal Principles

- A denial of certiorari does not decide the merits and does not establish Supreme Court precedent on the questions presented.
- Justice Scalia’s dissent argued that § 1346’s “honest services” concept had been applied to a wide range of conduct and failed to give clear notice of what is criminal, raising vagueness concerns.
- The dissent also warned that broad readings of § 1346 risk federalism problems by effectively allowing federal prosecutors and courts to police ethical standards for state and local officials without clear congressional direction.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court declined to review the petitioners’ honest-services fraud convictions, leaving the lower-court decision intact; Justice Scalia’s dissent criticized § 1346 as vague and overinclusive and urged the Court to clarify the statute’s limits.


Sorich v. United States, 555 U.S. 1204 (2009)