Appeals court refuses to toss charges against Sen. Menendez

[DonViejo]

Source: Associated Press

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A federal appeals court has refused to dismiss corruption charges against U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey.

An attorney for the indicted Democrat had argued the charges should be tossed because of a constitutional clause that protects the actions of sitting lawmakers. But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on Friday ruled against that. The panel found the dispute is something that needs to be decided at trial.

Menendez’s lawyer argued in February that the senator’s meetings with government officials were held to discuss policy matters, not to benefit a wealthy friend. Prosecutors allege the friend, Florida ophthalmologist Salomon Melgen, plied Menendez with gifts and campaign donations in exchange for political influence.

Menendez and Melgen have pleaded not guilty to bribery and fraud charges.

###

Read more: http://www.salon.com/2016/07/29/appeals_court_refuses_to_toss_charges_against_sen_menendez/

---

The Latest: Ruling against US Sen. Menendez will be appealed

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — The Latest on an appeals court ruling in the corruption case against Sen. Bob Menendez (all times local):

1:20 p.m.

An attorney for U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez says he will ask the full 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a three-judge panel’s ruling allowing the corruption case against him to move forward.

Abbe Lowell says he will appeal Friday’s decision to the full circuit court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

Lowell argues that charges accusing the New Jersey Democrat of accepting gifts in exchange for political influence should be tossed because of a constitutional clause that protects the actions of sitting lawmakers.

-snip-

[red dog 1]

1. I don't know if Menendez is guilty or not, but at least he's not in jail,

unlike former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, an innocent victim of Karl Rove, a corrupt U.S. Attorney (Laura Canary) and a corrupt judge.

[uwep]

2. Didn't the Supreme Court just ruled in favor of Gov. Bob McDonnell?

Was he not doing the same thing? Cars, rings, trips? Someone needs to tell the appeals court.

[former9thward]

3. I am pretty sure the appeals court is aware of the McDonnell decision.

And that will be argued at a later point. What was being argued at this court was the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution. That clause says that members of Congress shall not be questioned in any other place for anything they say in speeches or debate. I agree with the court that this section of the Constitution does not apply to this case. He may have better luck in arguing the McDonnell decision applies to his actions.