Skip to main content

Exit WCAG Theme

Switch to Non-ADA Website

Accessibility Options

Select Text Sizes

Select Text Color

Website Accessibility Information Close Options
Close Menu

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear “Bridgegate” Case & Decide If Those Involved Committed Fraud


In January, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the “Bridgegate” case involving government officials reallocating lanes on the George Washington Bridge connecting New York with New Jersey as a form of political retaliation, punishing the mayor of Fort Lee for failing to endorse then New Jersey governor Chris Christie’s campaign. According to one such individual who pled guilty to conspiracy, over the course of four days, one lane instead of three were kept open during rush hour on the bridge, which resulted in a number of issues, including paramedics having to cross the bridge on foot. The Court will now decide if those involved are guilty of criminal activities in response to both their actions and making up a fake study to justify their actions. A number of governor Christie’s staff has already pled guilty to wire fraud, conspiracy, federal-program fraud, and related convictions. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals also upheld the convictions.

Two of the defendants then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the convictions would set a precedent of “criminaliz[ing] politics.” Specifically, they argue that lying in claiming to act in the public interest does not rise to the level of a federal felony offense, but is rather simply a “political abuse of power” that should be addressed “politically.” Conversely, the government argues that the defendants went to great lengths to lie and engage in fraud.

The Federal Crime of Fraud

The federal crime of fraud requires that someone devices or intended to devise a scheme or artifice to defraud or to obtain property or money by means of “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises… causing to be transmitted by wire, radio or television communication in commerce. Here, the government argues that the elements are satisfied because:

  • The “scheme” involves the materially false statements about the study that did not exist;
  • The false pretenses were used to control the Port Authority resources necessary to block the lanes; and
  • The resources were payments to workers “who would not otherwise have been on duty.”

The Dangers of Prosecutorial Overreach for Political “Crimes”

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers supports the defendants, filing an amicus brief that warns the Court of the dangerous precedent set by using the criminal process for what should be controlled by the political process and referring to the government’s case as “prosecutorial overreach.”

Contact Our Criminal Defense Attorneys If You Have Any Questions or Concerns

If you have been charged with federal or state fraud and conspiracy charges, contact The Baez Law Firm today to find out how our top Orlando criminal defense attorneys can best ensure that your rights are protected and you are not convicted of crimes that do not exist and are best decided by the voters, not the courts.



By submitting this form I acknowledge that form submissions via this website do not create an attorney-client relationship, and any information I send is not protected by attorney-client privilege.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Skip footer and go back to main navigation