gloss · the reading room

Landor v. Louisiana Dept of Corrections and Public Safety · ¶43

With the question correctly framed, the distinction between this case and Sabri becomes unmistakable. Section 666 addresses thieves, fraudsters, bribers, and others who threaten to “fritte[r] away in graft” the funds Congress distributes pursuant to the Spending Clause. 541 U. S., at 605. The thief steals allocated money; the fraudster extracts it under false pretenses; the briber obtains it by greasing palms. “Congress,” Sabri held, “does not have to sit by and accept the risk” actors of that sort pose to its constitutionally enumerated spending power. Ibid. Instead, as a necessary and proper incident to that power, Congress may punish people who seek to sap federal funds from their intended beneficiaries. See ibid. And Congress may do so, Sabri concluded, even where not every misappropriated dollar may be “‘traceabl[e]’” to “‘specific federal payments.’” United States v. Comstock, 560…
Read in context ›

slip opinion, revised 6/28/26
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.