Court Battles

Supreme Court clears way for dismissal in case of ex-Cincinnati City Council member pardoned by Trump

by Ella Lee - 04/06/26 9:52 AM ET

Link copied

by Ella Lee - 04/06/26 9:52 AM ET

Link copied

NOW PLAYING

A former Cincinnati City Council member convicted of bribery and attempted extortion but later pardoned by President Trump may now see his case dismissed after the Supreme Court cleared the way.

In an order Monday, the justices declined to hear arguments in Alexander “P.G.” Sittenfeld’s appeal of his 2022 conviction, instead granting his petition only to vacate a lower court’s holding and kick the case back there, where the case can be dismissed for good.

Sittenfeld had urged the high court to weigh in over when political campaign donations cross the line into felony bribes, asking if “unambiguous” evidence of a quid pro quo is required to secure a conviction for bribery based on campaign contributions.

The Democratic ex-Cincinnati City Council member was found guilty of agreeing to accept $20,000 in donations to his political action committee from undercover FBI agents posing as advocates for a downtown property.

Prosecutors said the scheme crossed the line from campaign fundraising to bribery, amounting to an illegal quid pro quo for supporting the development project.

Sittenfeld argued that candidates routinely raise money by pledging official actions, like vowing to cut taxes or repeal a certain laws with constituents’ financial support.

“Such campaign solicitations are the lifeblood of our representative democracy, and they lie at the heart of the First Amendment’s protection,” his attorney, Noel Francisco, wrote in his petition.

“But ambitious prosecutors can easily paint the same donations as corrupt agreements — a picture that many jurors hostile to money in politics will eagerly accept.”

However, the government said Trump’s pardon rendered his challenge moot.

“Petitioner expresses concerns that the pardon does not return his $40,000 fine or eliminate the collateral consequences of his conviction, but those concerns rest on an unduly narrow view of the President’s pardon power,” lawyers in the solicitor general’s office wrote.

“Regardless, to effectuate the pardon and avoid any doubt about its effects, the government has filed a motion in the district court … to vacate the judgment and dismiss the indictment with prejudice,” they continued.

Before his indictment in November 2020, Sittenfeld was seen as a prospective frontrunner for mayor of the city.

His conviction resulted in a 16-month prison sentence, though he was ordered released pending appeal less than five months into his term by a federal appeals court panel.

When the panel voted 2-1 to uphold his conviction in February, he faced a return to prison unless the Supreme Court took up his case, which the panel had urged the justices to do.

But Trump’s pardon, granted in May, took that off the table. It came alongside acts of clemency for 25 others, including longtime political allies, reality TV stars and a Louisiana rapper.

“Each one represents a story of redemption, rehabilitation, and resilience,” White House pardon czar Alice Marie Johnson wrote on the social platform X at the time. “Their second chance is a second shot at life.”

Add as preferred source on Google