Fischer v. United States — dissenting

Summary

Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, dissented from the Court's interpretation of the Medicare-related jurisdictional requirement in 18 U.S.C. § 666(b). The dissent would construe "benefits" to mean useful aid or financial assistance to the recipient organization, not reimbursement paid to a medical provider in exchange for services rendered to Medicare patients. It also contends that the Court's broader interpretation conflicts with the rule of lenity and raises constitutional concerns about federal criminal jurisdiction.