Supreme Court weighs whether federal false-statement law covers ‘misleading’ but technically true remarks

The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in Thompson v. United States over whether 18 U.S.C. §1014 — the criminal provision governing false statements to influence financial institutions — reaches statements that are true as phrased but misleading in context. Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Garek, urged the court to rule that the statute punishes only objectively false statements, while government counsel, Ms. Flynn, told the justices that falsity must be assessed in context and that a jury could reasonably find petitioner’s statements untrue.

The question matters because a broad reading would allow prosecutors to pursue a range of “half-truth” and omission-based theories against people who deal with banks and federal agencies. “Section 10 14 punishes only false statements, not true but misleading ones,” Mr. Garek said at the start of argument, asking the court to limit the statute to objective falsity and remand the case for the lower courts to apply that standard to the record. Ms. Flynn countered that a statement is “false if it conveys an…