South SFV Today

On July 16, 2024, New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez was convicted on charges of bribery, fraud, and extortion. Menendez, a Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was accused of orchestrating a bribery scheme that included selling his office to foreign powers and business executives. His conviction marks the first time a U.S. senator has ever been found guilty of being a foreign agent. Here, Stanford Law School criminal law expert Robert Weisberg discusses the charges and conviction.

Can you briefly explain the charges against Senator Menendez?

"The gist is pretty plain old bribery. The government decided to gild the prosecutorial lily by framing the case under three different statutes—18 USC 201 (bribe taking by a federal official) but also a wire fraud and even an extortion count. But the different statutory definitions of these don’t matter much here. They’re all about the same crooked deals. Oh, and the government lassoed the Senator and his spouse and some of the bribe-payors into conspiracy charges as well."

"Menendez and his wife received things of great value in exchange for him engaging in actions which lay within his power. One payor was working for the Egyptian government, and Menendez used his power on the Senate Foreign Services Committee to release arms funding to Egypt. Two other payors ran a company which sought to be the sole certified importer to the US of Halal food; Mendez used his influence to lean on the US Department of Agriculture to make sure this business kept its monopoly. Finally, one of the bribe payors was worried that two of his business associates were facing state criminal charges in New Jersey, and Menendez used his considerable influence with the state prosecutor in an effort to get those charges dropped. But there was also a federal charge against one of the payors, and Mendez agreed to lean on the President, who was about to pick a new US Attorney for New Jersey, to choose a particular candidate Menendez was confident would be favorable towards this payor."

So, these crimes are very serious.

"Very serious felonies. Prison aside, they will likely quickly lead to his removal from the Senate, by resignation or force."

How tough a case was this for the prosecution?

"The case was a dream for the prosecutor. We’ve all read about the gold bars found in the search of the Menendez home, and then there were envelopes stuffed in various places in the house full of cash with writing on the outside connecting to the payors. And then there was Mercedes 'bought' by Ms. Menendez but paid for by one of the confederates. Oh, plus a no-show job offered Ms. Menendez. Why were these riches conferred? The government obtained thousands of texts among parties helping meet requirement quid pro quo—the goodies were direct consideration for Senator’s favorable actions." (Plus some oddities like proof that Menendez googled "What is value kilo gold?")

What were challenges for defense team?

"The defense had little work with argued dots prosecution connecting really unconnected jury trouble concluding otherwise defense tried pin blame Ms. Menendez not Senator fact charged separate trial delayed undergoing cancer treatment jury obviously found plenty guilt go around both finally conceding gold bars unusual things house defense argued gold cash etc merely generous gifts one confederates sympathetic Ms. Menendez financial difficulty."

What are Menendez’s next legal moves? Does an appeal stand good chance succeeding?

"Of course he will appeal argue jury decision unsound facts kind ‘insufficiency evidence’ argument rarely wins appellate courts defer jury judgments credibility weight evidence true legal arguments recent years Supreme Court overturned number major white-collar convictions narrowly construing laws see rulings applicable key case reversal conviction Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell years back Court found McDonnell offered return money truly official act rather minor political favor official acts Menendez very different."

What kind sentence is Menendez looking at?

"Multiple charges essentially grouped maximum theoretical sentence 20 years still plenty judicial discretion rough guess mid high single digits get consideration age first-time offender."

Do you have any additional thoughts about this conviction?

"It’s hard imagine more incompetent criminal last year one lawyers arranged so-called proffer session prosecutor lawyer try make case charges unsound lawyer said might convincing also false not because lawyer lied fed false information once found out prosecutor added obstruction justice charge just convicted."

Robert Weisberg JD ’79 Edwin E Huddleson Jr Professor Law works primarily field criminal justice writing teaching areas criminal law criminal procedure white collar crime sentencing policy founded serves faculty co-director Stanford Criminal Justice Center SCJC promotes coordinates research public policy programs criminal law criminal justice system including institutional examination police correctional systems.

©Copyright Stanford University Stanford California 94305