Again criticizing Lay and Skilling for offering a "doofus defense" ("a plea of not guilty by reason of empty-headedness"), the paper stated that "Lay and Skilling took hundreds of millions in compensation yet now fail to accept the responsibility that went with it." Justice GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. In urging invalidation of § 1346, Skilling swims against our case law's current, which requires us, if we can, to construe, not condemn, Congress' enactments. During questioning, she acknowledged having previously thought the defendants were guilty, and she disclosed that she lost $50,000-$60,000 in her 401(k) as a result of Enron's collapse. "The bottom line," the court stressed, "is that we want ... jurors who ... will faithfully, conscientiously and impartially serve if selected." Not until just recently this week, but nothing—. We Moreover, in referencing the length of the voir dire in this case, I do not mean to suggest that length should be a principal measure of the adequacy of a jury selection process. We agree that § 1346 should be construed rather than invalidated. 1899 (KENNEDY, J., dissenting) ("Our willingness to accord substantial deference to a trial court's finding of juror impartiality rests on our expectation that the trial court will conduct a sufficient voir dire to determine the credibility of a juror professing to be impartial"). Ibid. App. 2d 619, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5259, Combined Opinion from App. 879 (1907) (opinion for the Court by Holmes, J.). Id., at 933a-934a. See 3 Supp. 554 F.3d, at 561. To place Skilling's constitutional challenge in context, we first review the origin and subsequent application of the honest-services doctrine. In the words of one article, "there was one thing those whose lives were touched by the once-exalted company all seemed to agree upon: The indictment of former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling was overdue." If the circumstances were not of this character, did the District Court conduct a jury selection process sufficiently adapted to the level of pretrial publicity and community animus to ensure the seating of jurors capable of presuming innocence and shutting out extrajudicial influences? Ibid. The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants a trial before "an impartial jury." In light of these answers, the District Court did not commit manifest error in finding Juror 20 fit for jury service. Prospective jurors who "hope[d]" they could presume innocence and did "not necessarily" think Skilling was guilty were permitted to remain in the pool. Irvin v. Dowd, 366 U.S. 717, 723, 81 S.Ct. 1467, 1472 (W.D.Okla.1996) (prejudice "may go unrecognized in those who are affected by it. See United States v. Lanier, 520 U.S. 259, 266, 117 S.Ct. 2d 619, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5259 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to … 131sa-133sa, 136sa (Juror 67) (had no connection to Enron and no anger about its collapse); App. The Government urges us to go further by locating within § 1346's compass another category of proscribed conduct: "undisclosed self-dealing by a public official or private employee—i.e., the taking of official action by the employee that furthers his own undisclosed financial interests while purporting to act in the interests of those to whom he owes a fiduciary duty." 774, 145 L.Ed.2d 792 (2000); Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 215-218, 102 S.Ct. But in Rabbitt, 583 F.2d 1014, the Eighth Circuit held that actual harm to the State was needed, id., at 1026. It is therefore clear that, as we read § 1346, Skilling did not commit honest-services fraud. Ante, at 2917. See also id., at 1040, 104 S.Ct. But in transforming the prohibition of "honest-services fraud" into a prohibition of "bribery and kickbacks" it is wielding a power we long ago abjured: the power to define new federal crimes. Reviewing courts are properly resistant to second-guessing the trial judge's estimation of a juror's impartiality, for that judge's appraisal is ordinarily influenced by a host of factors impossible to capture fully in the record—among them, the prospective juror's inflection, sincerity, demeanor, candor, body language, and appre-hension of duty. 4, 6, supra. Juror 20, he observes, "said she was `angry' about Enron's collapse and that she, too, had been `forced to forfeit [her] own 401(k) funds to survive layoffs.'" Jury selection, we have repeatedly emphasized, is "particularly within the province of the trial judge." § 1346 (2006 ed., Supp. 1639. In reviewing claims of this type, the deference due to district courts is at its pinnacle: "A trial court's findings of juror impartiality may be overturned only for manifest error." Id., at 728, 81 S.Ct. More than one-third of the prospective jurors (approximately 99 of 283, by my count) indicated that they or persons they knew had lost money or jobs as a result of the Enron bankruptcy.

Novak Djokovic Celery Juice, Free Men, Nobody Wonder Girls Lyrics, The Greatest Question, Daniel Nestor Runner, Million Man March 2020 August,