Bribery in Self-Defense

Ronnie Gilley built a business in Alabama, and then- Gov. Bob Riley wanted to shut it down . Now Gilley's bound for prison -- for defending himself improperly.

Governor Riley claimed the gambling machines in Gilley's Country Crossing bingo casino were illegal. He threatened to launch raids and shut down the business, Gilley testified. So Gilley, along with others in the same line, set out to get the law changed to make clear that his business was legal.

So far, so legal.

But according to the charges to which Gilley pleaded guilty, he resorted to illlegal means to get the law changed, bribing legislators to back his agenda. For this, he has been sentenced to almost seven years in prison .

And that's taking into account that he pleaded guilty and cooperated with prosecutors.

Now, there is a basis for having bribery laws: If you can bribe people to make good laws, you can bribe them to make bad ones, and an open market for legislative votes would be more likely to promote cronyism than rights. But note that in this case, Gilley committed bribery in self-defense.

The purpose of the state is to protect individual rights, including the right to run gambling businesses. Integrity in the pursuit of that purpose requires that legislators not pursue contrary goals -- neither goals based on short-term material desires, such as collecting bribes, nor goals based on altruistic, "noble" desires, such as deterring gambling. Upholding public integrity, then, may require punishing those who offer or accept bribes -- but more importantly, it requires eliminating laws that sacrifice some people's rights to other people's desires, and making clear that such laws are unacceptable. So long as citizens cannot adequately protect their rights without resorting to bribery, punishing those who do use bribes leaves the most important part of the task undone.

‍