Federal rules allow delegates to the Republican National Convention in July to accept unlimited donations that generally do not need to be reported publicly, but an apparent open door for de facto vote-buying may be unwise to walk through this year.

That’s partially because the party’s choice of an Ohio venue for what may become the first contested presidential convention in recent years brings into the picture a broad, rarely used state law against bribery that puts a question mark over allowable gifting to the 2,472 delegates.

The constraints imposed by theoretical state enforcement actions are remarkable compared with federal election finance law. Former members of the Federal Election Commission tell U.S. News that because conventions generally are sleepy candidate coronations there’s not obvious case law or federal statutes that would ban “donations” of cars, vacations or suitcases of cash to delegates.

Ohio’s anti-bribery law from the 1870s, meanwhile, is so broadly worded as to arguably ban gift-giving to any person who may ever vote in an election.

Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty, a Democrat, and a receptive jury can use the law to make fourth-degree felons out of Cleveland convention attendees. But a spokesman says the office won’t comment on potential enforcement, even as delegates book plane tickets and hotel rooms that often are paid for by candidates or through fundraising.

The Ohio law, addressed in a widely circulated ABC News article last week, says: “No person shall before, during, or after any primary, convention, or election. … Give, lend, offer, or procure or promise to give, lend, offer, or procure any money, office, position, place or employment, influence, or any other valuable consideration to or for a delegate, elector, or other person.”

The language, with no timeframe for “before … or after," could be seen at its broadest as dangling a felony charge over anyone who gives anything to a past or future delegate or voter. Violators risk losing electoral eligibility, though state legal experts scoffed at that provision applying to a presidential candidate.

Ohio State University law professor Daniel Tokaji says he doubts the law would be read by the local prosecutor to outlaw all delegate fundraising, saying the words "or any other valuable consideration" imply an exchange is necessary.

"It doesn't seem plausible that the statute would be read to apply to merely giving a gift or raising money, I think there's got to be some sort of exchange," Tokaji says. "It would be preposterous to enforce it in the way that its language on its face may be understood – [such as against someone giving] a gift to [their] daughter who's a delegate."

Still, it remains unclear if standard donations by presidential campaigns and their supporters to delegates, or non-monetary gifts like a golf trips or flights aboard a private jet or comped stays at a Trump hotel could put someone in legal crosshairs. At a contested convention, no candidate secures a majority of delegate votes on the first ballot, launching feverish wooing and horse-trading ahead of subsequent votes, with delegates no longer bound to vote a particular way.

If McGinty’s staff does decide to prosecute anyone, in many cases it would be more difficult than referencing Federal Election Commission filings, as FEC guidelines allow individual convention delegates to raise unlimited funds that do not need to be disclosed to the commission.

There are some exceptions. Group fundraising efforts by “delegate committees” have limits and reporting obligations, and if a presidential campaign or candidates make a donation they, too, would have to report the spending.

Convention-related costs “can run into the thousands of dollars” for delegates, says former FEC Chairman Michael Toner, and current FEC policy says “presidential candidates can pay for those types of expenses [for delegates], it’s very straightforward.”

Toner says that, although presidential campaigns would need to report the donations, wealthy individuals and super PACs can write a blank check to delegates with neither party obligated to report it to anyone other than tax authorities, should it be deemed income or eligible for gift taxes.

None of the funds accepted by delegates can come from corporations, labor unions, foreigners or federal contractors.

Toner says attorneys will carefully study the Ohio law and potentially applicable federal laws and those in states that send delegates, if a contested convention looks likely.

“We don’t have a lot of history of these laws being applied to a private citizen who’s a delegate at a convention,” Toner says. Many potentially relevant laws, he adds, are not geared to “a farmer from Arkansas who’s at the Cleveland convention and gets $20,000.”

Karl Sandstrom, another former FEC commissioner, notes in most presidential election cycles the nominees are determined before conventions, diminishing the allure of potential misconduct.

“It just has not come to the fore in the past couple of decades,” he says.

Sandstrom says it's possible not only for candidates to cover delegates' tabs, but for campaigns to hire influential delegates who could sway a bloc. But he doubts anyone would openly offer money to delegates as thinly veiled inducements, saying the political consequences alone could be ruinous.

“That’s too wild, I don’t want to speculate on someone pursuing that strategy,” he says, adding: “You have to ensure your behavior is non-criminal under federal law and also under state law.”

Robert Lenhard, like Toner a former FEC chairman, says he would caution delegates and potential donors not to risk the wrath of prosecutors.

Lenhard says that although convention delegate-bribing is “a very undeveloped area of law right now,” that could change if state or federal prosecutors are sufficiently motivated.

“If you’re thinking of engaging in egregious behavior, I would not assume just because the FEC does not regulate this beyond some narrow rules around how delegates raise funds that you could get away with whatever you wanted,” he says.

Lenhard says local prosecutors may indeed see the Ohio law as a path to punishing misconduct, or Justice Department attorneys, alarmed at a possible buying of the presidency, might intervene, perhaps seeking to apply federal laws against general election vote-buying or bringing a tangential charge for lying to investigators.

“I wouldn’t assume it was something I would easily get away with,” Lenhard says, pointing out transferring large sums of money is difficult to do slyly, evidenced by the recent exposure of decades-old sexual molestation allegations against former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who was paying off a victim.

“I wouldn’t want to be the person who led the charge [within a] campaign for that kind of activity," he adds. "If you’re wrong, you’re the one who’s going to be held accountable and everyone else will disavow you.”

Lenhard says it’s unlikely delegates would be nabbed after reporting donations as taxable income with the Internal Revenue Service. He says it's more likely parties to such transactions would tell a friend or coworker, sparking rumors, speculative news reports and then official investigations.

“People who want to push the envelope should look very long and hard to make sure all of these different kinds of statutory laws couldn’t be brought into play,” Lenhard says.

It’s unclear if the specter of state charges will deter convention attendees from raising money for the partisan festival. When the obscure state law was raised by ABC News, RNC spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said: “The Ohio state statute is a regulation set forth by the state of Ohio. ... It is up to the individual delegates and campaigns to ensure that they are in compliance with any applicable federal regulations.” Walters did not respond to a request for clarification on what the RNC would advise delegates to do.

It's unclear if delegates will receive any governmental guidance, either. Spokespeople for the Ohio attorney general’s office, the Ohio secretary of state’s office, the Ohio Elections Commission and the Ohio Ethics Commission say interpreting the law is outside the role of their offices.

In Ohio, each county prosecutor has complete jurisdiction over crimes committed within their county, except for crimes statutorily assigned to the attorney general, like voter fraud and health care fraud, says Dan Tierney, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office. An Ohio county prosecutor displeased with inaction from the Cuyahoga County prosecutor would be unable to file charges unless some element of an alleged crime happened in their jurisdiction.