A number of so-called “white collar” offenses involve someone accused of intentionally making an untrue or inaccurate statement on an official document or to law enforcement or other authorities. Under federal law, it’s a criminal offense to make “any false statement or report” to federal regulators.
That was an offense at the heart of a case involving a former Chicago politician that made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) earlier this year. The defendant’s argument was that the information he provided the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) regarding some bank loans, while “misleading,” was not actually “false.”
Let’s take a look at the case and what SCOTUS’s ruling could mean for many other cases.
The case of the Chicago politician
The former alderman, who is a member of the storied Daley political dynasty in Chicago, acknowledged that he reported only one of several bank loans that totaled over $250,000 to the FDIC. The regulatory agency was seeking repayment of customers’ loans, including interest, after the bank failed in 2017.
After being charged with violating federal law by making false statements, he argued that the statements weren’t actually false because the information he provided was accurate – just not complete. He acknowledged that it was misleading.
“False and misleading are two different things”
The justices, in a rare unanimous decision, agreed that these are two different things. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote in part, “False and misleading are two different things. A misleading statement can be true. And a true statement is obviously not false. So basic logic dictates that at least some misleading statements are not false.” Roberts noted that some laws address false and misleading statements, so the lack of the word “misleading” in this particular law seems to be intentional.
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, while voting with the other justices to send the case back to the federal appeals court, wrote a separate opinion. She urged the appeals court to affirm the trial court’s ruling that the defendant’s statements were indeed false.
Certainly, it’s best to avoid making misleading, incomplete or false statements on official documents or in sworn statements. However, this case shows how definitions matter and that it’s possible to have some success challenging the letter and spirit of the law. That’s why having experienced legal guidance can make all the difference.