Federal prosecutors issued a 150-page rebuttal to Bob Menendez's attempt to dismiss his bribery conviction, telling the judge that the evidence against the former Democrat senator is "overwhelming," Politico reported Thursday.
The filing came in response to his attorneys' motion last month to vacate the conviction on the basis of the "speech or debate" clause of the Constitution that protects lawmakers. His lawyers argued that evidence shown in the trial should not have been revealed to the jury, such as testimony from two of his own aides.
Prosecutors, in their filing to U.S. District Court Judge Sidney Stein, said the evidence "was not merely sufficient to prove every count, it was overwhelming," they wrote.
They also wrote it's up to a jury to decide "whether a scheme involved an official act," according to the report.
The Speech or Debate Clause is a provision in the U.S. Constitution that protects members of Congress from civil and criminal lawsuits and questioning for their legislative actions. The clause is found in Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the Constitution.
Menendez was found guilty on 16 corruption charges on July 16. Prosecutors accused him of taking cash and gold bars from three businessmen in exchange for helping the governments of Qatar and Egypt. His sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 29. He resigned from the Senate on Aug. 20.
Menendez, 70, could spend the rest of his life in prison.
Though Menendez's lawyers successfully were able to exclude evidence being admitted using the "speech or debate" argument at least once during the two-month trial, Stein sided with prosecutors enough to provide fodder for appeals that could very well be decided by the Supreme Court, Politico reported.
Mark Swanson ✉
Mark Swanson, a Newsmax writer and editor, has nearly three decades of experience covering news, culture and politics.
© 2024 Newsmax. All rights reserved.