McNally v. United States
Citation: 483 U.S. 350 (1987)
Facts
Kentucky officials were convicted of mail fraud for participating in a self-dealing insurance procurement scheme that deprived the public of honest government services. No money or property was directly misappropriated from the public treasury.
Issue
Does the federal mail fraud statute (18 U.S.C. § 1341) protect against schemes to defraud citizens of their intangible right to honest government services?
Holding
No. The mail fraud statute protects only schemes to defraud involving money or property; it does not extend to intangible rights such as the right to honest and impartial government.
Rule
The mail fraud statute is limited to schemes directed at depriving victims of money or property. Schemes that deprive the public only of the intangible right to honest services do not fall within the statute.
Significance
- Dramatically narrowed the scope of federal mail fraud prosecutions that had expanded under the “intangible rights” theory in the 1970s–80s
- Congress responded by enacting 18 U.S.C. § 1346 (the honest services fraud statute), which restored intangible rights as a theory — but Skilling v. United States (2010) later narrowed § 1346 to bribery and kickback schemes
- Illustrates the interplay between statutory interpretation, prosecutorial expansion, and congressional response