Skip to main content


A central question in the ongoing debate over the future of the American political system is how to deal with public corruption. This Article first examines the dominant theme of the last thirty years: a relatively hard-line approach that Professor Brown refers to as the post-watergate concensus. In recent years, however, this approach has been subject to growing criminalization of government ethics; Professor Brown then turns to what can be viewed as the counterrevolutionary critique. Against this background, he considers the United States Supreme Court's contribution to the debate. Starting with the recent Sun-Diamond and Salinas cases, and drawing from decisions in areas ranging from extortion to honoraria bans to patronage, Professor Brown contends that the Court's decisions lend substantial support to the counterrevolutionary stance. He concludes by considering the question of whether future judicial and legislative developments will favor the counterrevolutionary thrust, or whether elements of synthesis and compromise will emerge.


File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
8 Sep 2022
4.24 MB