Richard Wolf

USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court granted a reprieve Monday to a former Republican governor of Virginia convicted of corruption, and in doing so made it harder for prosecutors to use federal fraud statutes against public officials.

In a unanimous decision that could benefit politicians and other public officials entangled by bribery, extortion and fraud statutes, the justices vacated the conviction of former governor Bob McDonnell while leaving open the possibility of a new trial.

Once seen as a potential Republican vice presidential candidate, McDonnell was convicted in 2014 and sentenced to two years in prison for accepting luxury gifts and loans from a wealthy businessman in exchange for performing "official acts" on his behalf. But the high court ruled that those acts were commonplace actions taken on behalf of constituents.

It was an unlikely, but not unexpected, ruling from an eight-member court no longer dominated by conservatives in the wake of Justice Antonin Scalia's death in February. At oral arguments in April, a clear majority of justices expressed concern that current laws allow prosecutors to characterize common favors as criminal acts.

"Our concern is not with tawdry tales of Ferraris, Rolexes and ball gowns," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in reference to some of the gifts bestowed on McDonnell and his wife, Maureen. "It is instead with the broader legal implications of the government's boundless interpretation of the federal bribery statute. A more limited interpretation of the term 'official act' leaves ample room for prosecuting corruption, while comporting with the text of the statute and the precedent of this court."

High court appears likely to ease public corruption rules in McDonnell case

In McDonnell's case, more than $175,000 in gifts he and his wife received were legal under Virginia law, no matter how unseemly. The issue was whether his actions — giving Jonnie Williams, the CEO of a Virginia company marketing vitamins and dietary supplements, access to government officials — constituted a quid pro quo.

The McDonnells, whose separation became public during their 2014 corruption trial but who sat together at the Supreme Court, accepted lavish gifts from Williams, such as $20,000 in designer clothes, $15,000 to cater a daughter's wedding and a $6,000 Rolex watch. In return, they helped Williams gain access to state university and health care officials who could assist in winning federal approval for one of his products.

Bob McDonnell was sentenced in 2015 to two years in prison; Maureen McDonnell received a year-and-a-day sentence. McDonnell's conviction was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit last summer. He could be retried, but it's not clear federal prosecutors will do that.

"From the outset, I strongly asserted my innocence before God and under the law. I have not, and would not, betray the sacred trust the people of Virginia bestowed upon me during 22 years in elected office," McDonnell said in a statement. "It is my hope that this matter will soon be over and that my family and I can begin to rebuild our lives."

Unlike many politicians-turned-prisoners, McDonnell, 62, cut something of a sympgathetic figure throughout the ordeal: A deeply religious family man whose marriage and finances went sour during his term-limited four years as governor. The high court, in fact, appeared to tip its hand in his favor last August when it allowed McDonnell to remain free while fighting his conviction.

The decision could have an impact on other public officials who run afoul of fraud statutes for behavior that could be considered business as usual in the corridors of power, rather than felonies.

Former governors such as Alabama's Don Siegelman and Illinois' Rod Blagojevich and George Ryan were convicted under federal bribery and "honest services" statutes. In New York, former legislative leaders Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos are appealing their federal bribery convictions.

McDonnell's lawyers contended that he did nothing unusual to help Williams, a friend of his wife's, nor asked anyone else to do so. Phone calls and referrals to government agencies, they said, were routine actions.

"This is a real cautionary alarm to prosecutors," McDonnell's lawyer, Noel Francisco of Jones Day, said. "I'd be very surprised if they try to retry this case."

Public-corruption cases just got harder to prove

The Justice Department saw things differently. Williams sought state university studies to bolster his case for federal approval of Anatabloc, a dietary supplement made by his company. He didn't get the endorsement he sought, but he gained significant access to the state's first couple, even winning a product launch at the governor's mansion.

That prompted Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben, who was making his 100th appearance before the high court, to warn that a ruling in McDonnell's favor "would send a terrible message to citizens."

It was not a winning argument. The majority of justices said upholding his conviction could endanger public officials who do favors for constituents while accepting campaign contributions, expensive lunches with wine, or a day's trout fishing excursion. In those and other instances, Roberts and several colleagues said, officials could cross the line between legal and illegal without realizing it.

"In the government's view, nearly anything a public official accepts -- from a campaign contribution to lunch -- counts as a quid; and nearly anything a public official does -- from arranging a meeting to inviting a guest to an event -- counts as a quo," Roberts said. "But conscientious public officials arrange meetings for constituents, contact other officials on their behalf, and include them in events all the time."

Supreme Court strikes down abortion restrictions

Supreme Court rules domestic abusers can lose gun ownership rights