Sekhar v. United States

Background

A state pension fund and its Comptroller were deciding whether to invest in a private fund run by FA Technology Ventures. The fund’s general counsel advised against the investment. Giridhar Sekhar, a managing partner at the private fund, sent anonymous threatening emails to the general counsel to force him to recommend approval; the messages were traced to Sekhar and his firm. A jury convicted Sekhar of attempted extortion under the Hobbs Act after finding he tried to obtain the general counsel’s recommendation.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether forcing someone to give a recommendation counts as “obtaining property” under the Hobbs Act. Looking at the law’s text, its common-law roots, and past cases, the Court concluded that extortion requires acquiring something of value that can be transferred or exercised by the wrongdoer. An internal, nonbinding recommendation cannot be transferred or possessed by a third party. The Court explained that Congress knew how to punish mere coercion but chose language targeting the taking of property, so threatening to force advice is coercion, not extortion under §1951(b)(2).

Real world impact

The Court reversed the conviction and made clear that threatening a government employee to force an internal recommendation does not, by itself, satisfy the Hobbs Act’s requirement of obtaining transferable property. Prosecutors who wish to rely on federal extortion law must allege that the defendant sought and obtained something transferable or of value that could be exercised or sold. The decision leaves open other criminal theories for prosecuting threats depending on what the defendant actually sought to acquire.

Dissents or concurrances

A separate opinion agreed with the result but emphasized that an internal recommendation is not property and suggested the rule of lenity supports a narrow reading; it also noted extortion might apply if the defendant sought actual government funds, which the jury did not find.