18 U.S.C. § 666 – Theft/bribery concerning federal programs

18 U.S.C. § 666 – Theft/Bribery Concerning Federal Programs

18 U.S.C. § 666, also known as the federal program bribery statute, is a law that prohibits theft or bribery involving organizations or state/local governments that receive significant federal funds. This law was enacted by Congress in 1984 to protect the integrity of federal program funds and fill gaps in existing criminal laws.

In plain English, 18 U.S.C. § 666 makes it a federal crime to steal from, bribe, or otherwise misuse funds connected to organizations, state governments, or local governments that get a minimum amount of federal money each year. So even if the stolen money isn’t directly from the federal government, if the organization gets federal funding, stealing from it can be a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 666.

Key Elements of 18 U.S.C. § 666

For a theft or bribery crime to fall under 18 U.S.C. § 666, a few key elements must be met:

• The organization, government, or agency involved must receive benefits over $10,000 in federal assistance during a 1-year period;
• The defendant must be an agent of the organization – this includes employees, officers, or others connected to the organization;
• The defendant must steal or misapply property valued over $5,000, or solicit/accept a bribe worth over $5,000.

So in simple terms, if someone connected to an organization getting federal money steals or misuses $5,000 or more of that organization’s funds, they can face federal charges under 18 U.S.C. § 666. The penalty is up to 10 years in prison.

Purpose and Legislative History

Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 666 in 1984 to close loopholes in existing federal theft and bribery laws like 18 U.S.C. § 641 and 18 U.S.C. § 665. These laws made it hard to prosecute theft involving federal program funds given to non-federal entities like contractors, NGOs, or state/local governments.

For example, 18 U.S.C. § 641 only covered theft of federal property, not theft of funds administered by third parties. And 18 U.S.C. § 665 only covered theft related to specific federal programs like job training funds.

So Congress created 18 U.S.C. § 666 to protect the integrity of all federal program funds, regardless of who administers them. This closed loopholes and ensured federal prosecutors had tools to combat fraud/theft involving federal program spending.

Key Cases and Legal Precedent

There have been many key court cases that have shaped how 18 U.S.C. § 666 is applied and interpreted:

• Sabri v. United States (2004) – Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 666 and its broad application to organizations receiving federal funds.
• Fischer v. United States (2000) – Supreme Court ruled federal funds only need to be administered by the organization, not directly received from the federal government.
• United States v. Ng Lap Seng (2017) – Court ruled 18 U.S.C. § 666 prohibits bribes paid to influence any organization’s acts, not just federal acts.

These and other cases have shaped 18 U.S.C. § 666 into a broad and potent statute federal prosecutors rely on to combat public corruption, program fraud, and other offenses involving federal program funds.

Defenses and Challenges

There are some key defenses and challenges that can potentially defeat 18 U.S.C. § 666 charges or lead to acquittal:

• Lack of federal interest – Arguing the theft/bribery didn’t impact federal interests or programs.
• No agency relationship – Claiming the defendant doesn’t qualify as an “agent” under the law.
• No corrupt intent – Arguing the defendant lacked corrupt intent to defraud.
• Entrapment – Claiming law enforcement induced the defendant to commit the crime.

Skilled federal defense attorneys analyze the specifics of each case to identify defenses like these to get 18 U.S.C. § 666 charges dismissed or beat at trial.

Analysis and Discussion

18 U.S.C. § 666 is a powerful tool for federal prosecutors, but also controversial. Here are some key pros and cons:

Pros

• Helps protect federal funds from fraud/abuse
• Closes loopholes in existing federal theft/bribery laws
• Gives feds jurisdiction over non-federal organizations
• Broad interpretation allows maximum flexibility prosecuting corruption

Cons

• Some argue it gives feds too much power over state/local programs
• Vague language like “agent” can lead to overly broad application
• Past abuse by prosecutors led to reform efforts
• Critics say it tempts federal overreach into state/local matters

Overall, 18 U.S.C. § 666 remains a powerful and controversial federal statute – lauded by prosecutors as a potent anti-corruption tool but eyed warily by critics fearing federal overcriminalization. Careful, narrow application focused on clear federal interests is key to ensuring this law serves its intended purpose.

Conclusion

18 U.S.C. § 666 serves the important purpose of safeguarding federal funds and rooting out bribery/theft involving organizations that receive federal money. But prosecutors must be prudent in applying this broad statute to ensure federal power does not overreach into state/local affairs without clear federal interests at stake. This complex law will likely continue evolving as courts shape its boundaries. For now, 18 U.S.C. § 666 remains one of the justice system’s most potent weapons against corruption of federally funded programs.

Sources:

• 18 U.S. Code § 666 – Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds
• Government Program Fraud | 18 U.S. C. § 666 – Federal Criminal Defense Attorney
• Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds – Wikipedia
• 18 U.S.C. 666 – Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds – Content Details – USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap31-sec666 – GovInfo
• Elements of Offenses – 18 U.S.C. § 666A et seq. – Third Circuit
• Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds, 18 U.S.C. § 666 | Casetext