36°FFog/MistFull Forecast

Blagojevich files new argument in appeal

Published: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:28 p.m. CDT • Updated: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:30 p.m. CDT
(M. Spencer Green)
Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich autographing a 'Free Gov. Blago' sign March 14, 2012 for one of his supporters at his home in Chicago the day before Blagojevich was due to report to prison to begin serving a 14-year sentence on corruption charges. Blagojevich's lawyers submitted an additional argument on why an appeals court in Chicago should overturn the imprisoned former governor's convictions Wednesday, in Chicago. The two-page filing with the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals refers to an April Supreme Court decision striking down laws that restrict aggregate limits on campaign contributions. (AP file photo)

CHICAGO – Lawyers for imprisoned former Gov. Rod Blagojevich submitted an additional argument Wednesday to the federal court that's considering his appeal, saying a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision bolsters their contention that the Illinois Democrat never crossed the line from legal political horse trading into corruption.

Blagojevich, 57, is in his second year behind bars in a federal prison in Colorado serving a 14-year prison sentence for political corruption – including for seeking to sell or trade an appointment to President Barack Obama's vacated U.S. Senate seat in exchange for campaign contributions or a well-paying job.

The filing with the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago cites a decision by the nation's highest court in April. In that case, McCutcheon v. the Federal Election Commission, the court said soliciting contributions is corruption when a politician makes explicit promises to take official action for a donation.

That's something Blagojevich did not do, his attorneys say.

"The McCutcheon decision thus supports Blagojevich's position that, where a criminal prosecution is based upon attempts to solicit campaign contributions, the government must prove a quid pro quo or explicit promise," the two-page filing says. Federal prosecutors, it contends, failed to show Blagojevich did any such thing.

The Supreme Court's higher profile and most controversial finding in McCutcheon case was that laws restricting aggregate limits on campaign contributions were unconstitutional because they violate First Amendment protections of free speech.

Blagojevich's attorneys filed their appeal one year ago, and the sides held oral arguments before a three-judge panel in Chicago in December. Going more than six months without a decision on an appeal is unusual, though it is impossible to say if the lengthy consideration bodes well for Blagojevich or for prosecutors.

Prosecutors are likely to file a response to Wednesday's defense filing, though they aren't required to. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Chicago, Randall Samborn, declined any comment.

The panel's hard-hitting questions for a Blagojevich prosecutor during oral arguments raised defense hopes that some convictions could be thrown out. The questions' focus: Exactly where is the line between legal and illegal political wheeling and dealing? And did Blagojevich cross it?

At one point, Judge Frank Easterbrook noted how exceptional the prosecution of Blagojevich was. He even compared Blagojevich's bid to land a Cabinet seat to how President Dwight Eisenhower named Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court after Warren offered Eisenhower key political support during the 1952 campaign.

Get breaking and town-specific news sent to your phone. Sign up for text alerts from the Daily Chronicle.

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Reader Poll

Will you take advantage of more peak hour TransVAC Green Line runs?