The Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Kagan, let the government know that when charging 18 U.S.C. §1519, the SOX obstruction statute, venue needs to be where the alleged falsification occurred. See opinion here.
Abouammo, a former Twitter employee, was alleged to have “provided confidential information to a high-level Saudi official about two Saudi dissidents posting on the company’s platform” and “in return, the official wired Abouammo a total of $300,000.” After leaving employment at Twitter, Abouammo relocated to Seattle. Two San Francisco FBI agents showed up to interview him in Seattle and during the course of the exchange, the petitioner went upstairs in his home and emailed the FBI agents a document – all occurring in Seattle.
Indicted in San Francisco (N.D. Cal.) a venue issue arose because the interview and the alleged false document created, all occurred in Seattle.
The Court takes a firm view that venue lies in Seattle and not California. One looks at the conduct elements and the location of the act. The Court rejects the government’s arguments that mens rea should be examined for venue, and likewise rejects the governments arguments of effects jurisdiction and their request to treat this as an inchoate crime, like conspiracy. Bottom line – section 1519 is not like conspiracy, attempt, and solicitation.
The Court does note that its holding is “‘discrete’ and narrow, as our venue decisions usually are, because it is based on ‘the nature of the [specific] crime charged.” That said, this unanimous court rejects the government’s attempt to stretch venue beyond the location of the acts.
(esp)