A lot is riding on an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court case that centers on a federal law banning “honest services fraud.” If the SCOTUS were to weaken or nullify the "honest services" provision — as a number of groups want it to — it would seriously undermine efforts to prosecute officials for corruption.

How big is the SCOTUS case? So big that a judge has delayed a retrial for Kevin Ring, a former congressional staffer who worked for lobbyist Jack Abramoff, until the Supreme Court issues its decision.

Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, tells the Los Angeles Times what a negative ruling would mean:

"It would undercut public corruption cases across the board."

As the L.A. Times article points out:

Bribing a public official is also a crime, but it's hard to prove. Prosecutors must show an explicit deal between the official and the person offering the bribe.

Most politicians who break the law are smart enough to make bribes or other corrupt deals in ways that leave no paper trail or other clear evidence of a quid pro quo. That’s why having the honest services fraud law is so important.

CREW will monitor arguments in this critical SCOTUS case and continue to speak out about it in the weeks and months ahead.