Lawyers for the former AT&T Illinois boss accused of trying to bribe then-House Speaker Michael Madigan argue in a new filing that the prosecution’s case has been “significantly undermined” by a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling walking back a federal bribery statute
Paul La Schiazza, 66, was charged in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in October 2022 with conspiring to pay former state Rep. Edward Acevedo $2,500 a month in consulting fees as part of a plan to win Madigan’s backing of several pending pieces of legislation in Springfield. His trial is scheduled to kick off in September.
In a flurry of motions filed late Tuesday, however, La Schiazza’s attorneys asked the judge to toss key bribery and conspiracy counts in the indictment, order the government to turn over grand jury minutes, and limit the statements of alleged co-conspirators that can be introduced at trial.
The motions were the latest fallout from the high court’s ruling last month in the case of former Portage, Indiana Mayor James Snyder that held the federal bribery statute commonly known as “666” applies only to bribes, not gratuities, and that there must be a quid pro quo agreement to accept something of value in exchange for an official act.
In their filings, La Schiazza’s legal team repeatedly argued that the indictment fails to allege any direct connection between the payments to Acevedo, a longtime acolyte of the Democratic speaker, and Madigan’s efforts in 2017 to help pass legislation allowing AT&T to end mandatory landline service, which stood to save the company millions.
“The indictment does not allege facts establishing a causal connection between the legislative actions undertaken by Madigan and the benefits he allegedly received from AT&T, much less an express agreement by Madigan to undertake these acts in exchange for Mr. La Schiazza having AT&T offer Acevedo a consulting job,” the defense argued.
The motions argued that what prosecutors have charged was innocent, everyday conduct in politics, where business leaders hire lobbyists to push their positions on important policy matters and often respond to hiring requests from legislators.
“These kinds of requests are commonplace, and they persist to this day,” La Schiazza’s lawyers stated. “…Moreover, it is not unlawful for a constituent
to generally seek to generate goodwill.”
U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman told prosecutors to respond by July 30.
La Schiazza’s requests come on the heels of similar motions by Madigan himself, who along with his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, is charged in a separate racketeering indictment that includes the alleged AT&T bribery scheme.
Earlier this month, Madigan attorneys argued that 14 counts of his indictment are “fatally infirm” due to the Snyder ruling and should be dismissed, in part because there is no proof that the once-powerful Democratic leader agreed to use his official position for personal gain.
“The impact of Snyder on this case cannot be questioned,” the Madigan filing stated. “The Supreme Court clearly and definitively held that the statute applies only to bribes, not gratuities, and that bribery ‘requires that the official have a corrupt state of mind and accept (or agree to accept) the payment intending to be influenced in the official act.’ In other words, the government must establish a quid pro quo.”
The U.S. attorney’s office is expected to file a response to the Madigan motion next week.
In reaching their decision last month, the Supreme Court justices sided 6-3 with Snyder, who argued to the nation’s highest court that the anti-corruption law under which he was convicted is vague and could potentially criminalize innocent, everyday conduct. The decision vacated Snyder’s conviction for taking a $13,000 “consulting” fee from a garbage truck dealer that had recently won two lucrative contracts with the town.
The Snyder decision was the latest in a string of Supreme Court cases curtailing what the court has seen as overly broad federal anti-corruption statutes. The ruling drew criticism from proponents of good government, who worried the sweeping ruling would loosen the guardrails in a city and state where corrupt public officials have marched steadily to federal prison.
Jury selection in La Schiazza’s case is scheduled to start Sept. 9, just a month before Madigan and McClain are set to go on trial at the same Dirksen U.S. Courthouse on sweeping racketeering conspiracy charges that include the AT&T scheme as well as similar allegations regarding utility giant Commonwealth Edison.
Madigan had originally been scheduled to go on trial well before La Schiazza, but his case was postponed after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up Snyder’s case.
According to the charges against La Schiazza, the scheme to reward Acevedo began in February 2017, after the company learned through McClain that the speaker was looking to kick Acevedo some money. In an email exchange that March, AT&T Illinois’ director of legislative affairs asked two of the company’s executives if they were “100% certain” they would get credit “from the powers that be” if the payments were made to Madigan’s associate.
“I would hope that as long as we explain the approach to McClain and (the associate) gets the money then the ultimate objective is reached,” one of the executives allegedly wrote back.
The legislative affairs director responded, “I don’t think (La Schiazza) wants this based on hope. We need to confirm prior to executing this strategy,” according to copies of the emails included in court filings.
At McClain’s direction, AT&T employees then met with Acevedo to discuss a “pretextual” reason for the payments: to “prepare a report on the political dynamics of the General Assembly’s and Chicago City Council’s Latino Caucuses,” according to prosecutors.
Acevedo never did any real work for AT&T Illinois, however. Prosecutors alleged he balked at first at the payments, saying they were too low. But Acevedo agreed to the deal after McClain stepped in and said the amount was “sufficient.”
After a protracted fight, the landline bill passed during the final hours of the spring 2017 legislative session — with Madigan’s direct assistance, according to legislative records and a statement of facts agreed to in court by AT&T, which has entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. attorney’s office.
On June 29, 2017, Madigan permitted the bill to be brought to a vote and cast his ballot in favor of the legislation, records show. Two days later, after Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner vetoed the legislation, Madigan and the Democrat-led General Assembly overrode him, with Madigan again voting for the override.
Less than two weeks later, La Schiazza allegedly received a request from a Madigan relative to sponsor a nonprofit event.
The unidentified relative said the idea came “at the suggestion of our good friend, Mike McClain,” according to prosecutors. La Schiazza forwarded the request to a colleague in the legislative affairs department on July 12, 2017, writing “this will be endless.”
“I suspect the ‘thank you’ opportunities will be plentiful,’” the colleague allegedly emailed back, referring to the landline legislation.
“Yep,” La Schiazza allegedly responded. “We are on the friends and family plan now.”
Acevedo was convicted in 2021 on separate tax charges and sentenced to six months in prison.
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
