Several Fredericksburg-area lawmakers said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Monday to overturn former Gov. Bob McDonnell’s 11 corruption convictions confirms their belief that his conduct was improper, but not illegal.
Del. Mark Dudenhefer, R–Stafford County, said he was “very pleased and delighted” by the unanimous ruling. He said he thinks the case against McDonnell, a Republican, was politically motivated and that it “pretty much ruined his life.”
“I don’t like what he did and how he did it … but it was apparently never really illegal,” said Dudenhefer, adding that he hopes the McDonnell family can move on with their lives. “It’s unfortunate that this went a long way to ruining his legacy. I think he did a great job” as governor.
State Del. Mark Cole, R–Spotsylvania County, said it may have been unethical for McDonnell to accept more than $177,000 in gifts and loans from a businessman, but he doesn’t think it was illegal. Prosecutors said McDonnell violated a federal law that makes it a felony for an official to agree to take “official action” in exchange for something of value.
People are also reading…
“While I think Bob McDonnell did some things that were wrong, I don’t think he ever made a deal” by which “if you give me money, I’ll do this,” Cole said.
State Sen. Scott Surovell, a Democrat who represents a portion of North Stafford, said he was one of the first lawmakers to call for McDonnell’s resignation amid the scandal—calling the former governor’s actions unseemly and unacceptable.
Still, he said he agrees with the Supreme Court opinion.
Surovell, who is a Fairfax County attorney, said the prosecution’s broad interpretation of the federal bribery statute would have allowed politicians to be prosecuted for just about anything. “It basically gives the federal government a loaded gun to point at anybody … whenever they feel like it,” he said.
Surovell was one of two Democratic state lawmakers who signed an amicus brief supporting McDonnell’s appeal to the Supreme Court.
House Speaker Bill Howell, R–Stafford, said in a statement that he was relieved for McDonnell and his family. He said McDonnell takes responsibility for his actions, calling him a “good man with an honest heart.”
“The strength of the American legal system is measured not by the guilty convictions it levies, but instead by the innocence it preserves,” Howell stated.
A Richmond jury convicted Virginia’s 71st governor and his wife, Maureen, in September 2014 for accepting more than $177,000 in gifts and loans from Jonnie R. Williams Sr., then-CEO of Star Scientific, in exchange for promoting the company’s dietary supplement, Anatabloc. A three-judge federal appeals court panel affirmed the public corruption convictions in July 2015.
In his appeal, McDonnell’s lawyers urged the Supreme Court to reject what they called federal prosecutors’ “sweeping” theory of corruption law.
A federal appeals court can retry the case if it determines there is sufficient evidence to convict McDonnell under the Supreme Court’s standard.
University of Mary Washington political science professor Stephen Farnsworth said a retrial is unlikely, but possible. He noted that McDonnell encouraged state employees and members of his administration to study the dietary supplement—an action he said might meet the Supreme Court’s corruption threshold.
But the ruling creates a “high barrier” to retrying the case, Farnsworth added.
In his ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “setting up a meeting, calling another public official, or hosting an event does not, standing alone, qualify as an ‘official act.’ ”
“It’s pretty clear the Supreme Court decision allows politicians to continue to solicit and receive goodies from friends and donors, provided they don’t make explicit promises about what they will do in return,” Farnsworth said.
Regardless of what happens next, a political comeback isn’t in the cards for McDonnell, he said. A University of Mary Washington survey in October 2014 showed that 60 percent of Virginians thought he should be sentenced to prison.
Farnsworth said he doesn’t think public opinion has changed much since then.
“The bottom line is that the public was really upset at what the governor did, and that’s part of his legacy,” he said. “Whether the conviction stands or not, the governor was faulted in the court of public opinion.”