Patrick Leahy: “A trivial, attenuated financial benefit could not lead to this violation because the public official must still act…”

“A trivial, attenuated financial benefit could not lead to this violation because the public official must still act knowingly and with fraudulent intent to receive the benefit, and they must do so in violation of existing law. For example, if State ethics rules do not require disclosure of financial interests below a certain threshold, then undisclosed self-dealing--even with fraudulent intent--below that threshold could not be charged under this statute. Moreover, the amendment requires the public official to act for the purpose of benefiting a financial interest.”