John’s Rainey’s letter to the US Attorney William Nettle’s office regarding the actions of republican candidate Nikki Haley, has been the topic of  much discussion across the State of South Carolina.

As reported by The State Newspaper, Rainey’s letter directly questions the motives, and legality, of $42,500.00 that republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley received from Wilbur Smith Associates for work as a consultant, and  a whopping $110,000.00 that Haley received from the Lexington Medical Center Foundation for work conducted as a fundraiser.

Rainey’s letter argues that Haley acceptance of these funds violated the Hobbs Act,  and that Haley would not have been consulted or presented with this opportunity if she were not a member of the House of Representatives.

The Hobbs Act:  Extortion turned Bribery

The Hobbs Act, set forth in 18 U.S.C. 1951, is a broad sweeping Federal law which provides for the prosecution of Federal, State, or Local officials and prohibits a public official, such as Haley, from receiving money under the color of official right.

While the literal language of the Act makes it a crime to obstruct, delay, or affect commerce by robbery or extortion, the Act is interpreted as an extortion statute, due in part to a string of caselaw dealing with prosecutions under the act for bribery.

While we all know what bribery is, what qualifies as receiving money under the color of official right varies depending upon the Court; a standard clearer than the Supreme Court pornography analysis of we know it when we see it, but which varies depending upon the facts at hand.

Some Courts have held that to be guilty of a Hobbs Act violation, the public official does not have to actually have the power to perform the requested act  if it is reasonable to believe that the public official had the power to perform the requested act.

While Ms. Haley is currently serving in the House of Representatives for District 87 and is the republican frontrunner for the November 2010 gubernatorial election, we further point out that some Courts have held that the Hobbs Act may be applied to past or future public officials, further expanding the realm of those who may be charged with a Hobbs Act violation.

Under a conservative analysis, the real question here is whether the payments Hayley received were made in return for an explicit promise to perform, or not perform a specific act.    While we have not seen the infamous Rainey letter, John M Barton, who reviewed the letter at the State of South Carolina’s request, pointed out that the letter does not allege that a payment was made in return for a specific act;  Bill Nettles, United States District declined to comment on whether he had received the letter or if an investigation would occur.

The Strom Law Firm, LLC is centrally located in Columbia, South Carolina.