CINCINNATI (CN) - A unified Sixth Circuit panel on Tuesday upheld the federal racketeering conviction of former Ohio Speaker Larry Householder, who took bribes from FirstEnergy to make sure its failing nuclear power plants were bailed out by taxpayers.

The former Republican lawmaker, ousted from the top spot in the state legislature after his arrest, argued throughout his trial and appeal that his wheeling and dealing was part of the normal political process.

That argument failed to convince the jury that convicted him of a single RICO charge, and it failed again on appeal.

"Householder committed multiple RICO predicates when he solicited and received payments from FirstEnergy in exchange for specific official action. It was reasonable for a jury to conclude that he received money from FirstEnergy to finance a political machine that would elect him to the speakership; passed a billion-dollar bailout for FirstEnergy in return for those contributions; and solicited more contributions in exchange for agreeing to take official action to preserve that bailout," the panel said in its per curiam opinion.

The Zanesville native who pitched himself to the jury as a champion of the everyday Ohioan argued the donations from FirstEnergy could be plausibly explained as campaign donations, but the panel refused to second-guess the jury's determination.

The judges cited United States v. Sittenfeld, a Sixth Circuit case decided earlier this year, and emphasized that the possibility of more than one explanation for money changing hands does not preclude bribery convictions.

"'The government's evidence need not rule out all reasonable, alternative hypotheses to guilt.' We trust juries to 'parse words and actions to discern the intent behind them,' even in the context of campaign contributions," the panel said.

Householder also contested the trial court's decision to admit certain evidence, including recorded conversations that portrayed him as a vindictive, ruthless politician.

Specifically, Householder is heard on one tape asking an associate if they "should make some kind of a movement on [two opposing politicians] just to say that if you're going to fuck with me, I'm going to fuck with your kids."

The former speaker argued the audio snippets were prejudicial, but he had no luck convincing the appeals court panel because the evidence was used to directly contradict Householder's own testimony that he ran for speaker to "build bridges" in the Ohio political system.

A portion of Householder's appeal concerned the trial court's jury instructions, but much like his arguments about the evidence used to convict him, the challenge fell flat.

The instruction that defined the agreement necessary for "quid pro quo" bribery, for instance, was a near word-for-word recitation of that found in the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case Evans v. United States and, therefore, could not be considered a misinterpretation of the law.

Finally, Householder urged the appeals court to reduce his 20-year prison sentence, which he called unreasonable because of his age - 64 at the time of his sentencing - and the unlikelihood he would commit any further crimes, but the panel refused.

While the judges called the trial court's explanation of its sentencing decision "cursory at best," they concluded the nature of the crimes, the amount of money involved in both the bribes and the bailout, and false testimony given by Householder at the trial easily supported the maximum sentence imposed by U.S. District Judge Timothy Black.

Tuesday's decision also upheld the RICO conspiracy conviction of Matthew Borges, an associate of Householder who facilitated bribes and massaged state representatives during both the passage of House Bill 6 and a statewide recall effort that would have rescinded the power plant bailout included in the legislation.

The panel refused to overturn the jury's decision in spite of Borges' claim that he had no idea Householder and his cronies engaged in illegal activity.

In a concurring opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Amul Thapar, a Donald Trump appointee, expounded on the current caselaw regarding bribery in the political sphere and, specifically, the U.S. Supreme Court's application of the Hobbs Act - which deals with extortion - in bribery cases.

Thapar theorized such an expansion of the Hobbs Act likely criminalizes some campaign contributions, an effect "inconsistent with the constitution's ironclad protection of political speech."

He urged the Supreme Court to revisit its decision in Evans and, in what should give the former speaker a glimmer of hope, noted that "should the Supreme Court act, Householder's conviction may well fall."

Several of the men charged alongside Householder and Borges pleaded guilty, while codefendant Neil Clark died by suicide in 2021.

Also included on the panel were U.S. Circuit Judges John Nalbandian and Stephanie Dawkins Davis, Trump and Joe Biden appointees, respectively.

Neither party immediately responded to requests for comment.

Source: Courthouse News Service