Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court weighs whether fraud statutes require harm to a property interest in Cauciasis v. United States
Summary
At oral argument in Cauciasis v. United States, petitioner's counsel argued federal property‑fraud statutes require an actual harm to a traditional property interest and urged the Court not to convert contractual or regulatory breaches into federal crimes; the government urged a broader materiality/"essence of the bargain" approach with practical limits. The Court questioned both sides through hypotheticals ranging from charity fraud to a promised portrait or specific contractor participation in a PennDOT DBE program.
The Supreme Court heard argument in Cauciasis v. United States over whether the federal property‑fraud statutes (mail and wire fraud) require that a defendant’s scheme, if completed, cause harm to a traditional property interest or whether a material misrepresentation that induces payment is sufficient.
Mister Fisher, counsel for the petitioner, told the justices the phrase "defraud" carries the common‑law "soil" requiring an injury to property and argued that no property harm occurs "if somebody pays money in exchange for something and gets the full economic value of that bargain." He warned that accepting the government's broader theory would criminalize ordinary commercial puffery and regulatory noncompliance, saying, "Every day across the country, people use white lies, puffery, and other fraudulent promises to induce people to enter into…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat