United States v. El-Saadi
| Decision Date | 20 July 2021 |
| Docket Number | Criminal Action No. 19-374 (RDM) |
| Citation | 549 F.Supp.3d 148 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, v. Rani EL-SAADI, Stevan Hill, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
James Craig Mann, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Michael John Romano, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Victor R. Salgado, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Michelle Parikh, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for United States of America.
Justin V. Shur, MoloLamken LLP, Washington, DC, Megan Cunniff Church, Pro Hac Vice, MoloLamken LLP, Chicago, IL, for Defendant Rani El-Saadi.
Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., Edward B. MacMahon, Jr., PLC, Middleburg, VA, for Defendant Stevan Hill.
In this case, the government alleges two conspiracies involving eight defendants to funnel nearly $5 million into the 2016 presidential election in violation of campaign finance laws. Pending before the Court are motions from two of the defendants, Rani El-Saadi and Stevan Hill, to dismiss some of the charges against them. Dkt. 83; Dkt. 106. El-Saadi and Hill are each accused of making conduit contributions at the behest of defendant Ahmad Khawaja in violation of 52 U.S.C. § 30122. Specifically, to avoid exceeding the cap on the amount that he was individually permitted to contribute under federal law, Khawaja allegedly gave money to El-Saadi and Hill, who then donated that money using their own names to political committees associated with 2016 presidential candidates. El-Saadi and Hill seek the dismissal of the conduit contribution charges against them on the ground that venue in this District is improper because their alleged crimes did not occur in the District of Columbia. El-Saadi also seeks severance of his trial from that of his co-defendants. He argues that, because he played only a small role in one conspiracy, he will be prejudiced at trial by the disparity between the relatively small amount of evidence implicating him in that conspiracy and the relatively large amount of evidence against his co-defendants. For the following reasons, the Court will DENY the motions.
In 1971, Congress enacted the Federal Election Campaign Act ("FECA"), 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq. , to "remedy any actual or perceived corruption of the political process." FEC v. Akins , 524 U.S. 11, 14, 118 S.Ct. 1777, 141 L.Ed.2d 10 (1998). In pursuit of that goal, FECA imposes disclosure and reporting requirements on candidates for public office and their campaign committees, including by requiring the identification of individual donors who contribute more than $200. 52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(3)(a). As amended, FECA also imposes limits on the amounts that individuals and organizations may contribute to a candidate for federal office and the candidate's campaign committees. Id. § 30116(a). And the statute prohibits foreign nationals from making contributions "in connection with a [f]ederal, [s]tate, or local election." Id. § 30121(a)(1)(A). To prevent circumvention of these requirements, FECA provides that "[n]o person shall make a contribution in the name of another person or knowingly permit his name to be used to effect such a contribution, and no person shall knowingly accept a contribution made by one person in the name of another person." Id. § 30122.
Some of the alleged conduit contributions in this case were made to joint fundraising committees. FECA permits candidates and political committees to engage in joint fundraising through committees "established solely for the purpose of joint fundraising." 52 U.S.C. § 30102(e)(3)(A)(ii). Under governing Federal Election Commission regulations, participants in such a joint fundraising effort must "either establish a separate committee or select a participating committee[ ] to act as fundraising representative for all participants." 11 C.F.R. § 102.17(a)(1)(i). The regulations impose various procedural requirements on joint fundraising efforts. The participating committees must enter into a written agreement that "state[s] a formula for the allocation of fundraising proceeds." Id. § 102.17(c)(1). The contribution limit for a party donating to a joint fundraising committee is the sum of the limits for all participating committees. Id. § 102.17(c)(5). In soliciting contributions, the joint fundraising committee must provide a notice that includes "[t]he names of all committees participating in the joint fundraising activity" and "[t]he allocation formula to be used for distributing joint fundraising proceeds." Id. § 102.17(c)(2)(i). The participants or the fundraising representative must "establish a separate depository account to be used solely for the receipt and disbursement of the joint fundraising proceeds," and each participant must "amend its Statement of Organization to reflect the account as an additional depository." Id. § 102.17(c)(3)(i). The fundraising representative allocates gross proceeds according to the predetermined formula, allocates fundraising expenses, and then distributes the net proceeds to the participants. Id. § 102.17(c)(6)–(7). "For contribution reporting and limitation purposes, the date of receipt of a contribution by a participating political committee is the date that the contribution is received by the fundraising representative." Id. § 102.17(c)(3)(iii).
"All contributions deposited" by a joint fundraising committee "must be permissible under" FECA. Id. § 102.17(c)(3)(i). "The fundraising representative and participating committees [must] screen all contributions received to insure that the prohibitions and limitations [in FECA and its implementing regulations] are observed," including the prohibition on conduit contributions. Id. § 102.17(c)(4)(i) (emphasis added); see also id. § 110.4(b). With respect to reporting requirements, both the fundraising representative and the participating political committee must report contributions to the joint fundraising effort. Id. § 102.17(c)(8)(i). "After distribution of net proceeds, each participating political committee shall report its share of net proceeds received as a transfer-in from the fundraising representative." Id. § 102.17(c)(8)(i)(B).
In this case, the government brings a 64-page, 53-count indictment against eight defendants alleging two conspiracies to make excessive and conduit contributions in violation of FECA during the 2016 presidential campaign. The indictment alleges that, in the first conspiracy, defendant George Nader funneled $4.9 million in foreign funds to Khawaja (and Khawaja's company), who then made more than $3.5 million in unlawful conduit contributions to four political committees, including the fundraising committees of a 2016 presidential candidate.1 Dkt. 1 at 6–7 (Indictment ¶¶ 28a–28e). Nader and Khawaja allegedly hoped that these contributions would grant them access to and influence with this presidential candidate, which they could then parlay to gain favor with and financial support from the government of a foreign country. Id. at 5–6 (Indictment ¶¶ 24–25). The indictment does not allege that El-Saadi or Hill participated in that first conspiracy.
Count 13 of the indictment charges a second conspiracy in which Khawaja allegedly made excessive contributions to several political committees, with six of his associates, including El-Saadi and Hill, acting as conduits. Id. at 27–28 (Indictment ¶¶ 53a–53c). In all, Khawaja allegedly funneled more than $1.8 million to his co-conspirators for the purpose of making conduit contributions, again in the hopes of gaining political influence. Id. at 29 (Indictment ¶¶ 54, 57a). In particular, in September 2016, Khawaja arranged to host a private fundraiser for a presidential candidate in Las Vegas, Nevada, which required him to contribute or to raise $500,000 for that candidate's political committees. Id. at 30 (Indictment ¶ 58a). Because Khawaja could not contribute that amount himself without exceeding contribution limits, he allegedly provided funds to his co-conspirators to contribute in their names. Id. at 30–31 (Indictment ¶ 58a). As relevant here, on or about August 6, 2016, Khawaja allegedly gave Hill a check for $30,000, and on or about August 18, 2016, Khawaja allegedly gave Hill another check for an additional $75,000. Id. at 31 (Indictment ¶ 58c). On or about August 28, 2016, Hill allegedly sent a $100,000 check to a joint fundraising committee that the indictment refers to as Political Committee 2. Id. Although Hill made this donation in his own name, the indictment alleges that he did so "with monies funneled to him by KHAWAJA for the purpose of making the contribution and to avoid and exceed the personal contribution limits set by federal law." Id. Likewise, Khawaja's company allegedly gave $148,965 to El-Saadi's company on September 9, 2016, in connection with the Las Vegas fundraiser. Id. at 33 (Indictment ¶ 58g). On or about the same day, El-Saadi transferred $150,000 from his company's account to his personal account and then wrote a personal check for $150,000 to Political Committee 2. Id. Although El-Saadi made this donation in his own name, the indictment alleges that he did so "with monies funneled to him by KHAWAJA for the purpose of making the contribution and to avoid and exceed the personal contribution limits set by federal law." Id.
Although El-Saadi is accused of making only that single conduit contribution, the indictment alleges that Hill later made two additional conduit contributions as well. On or about June 16, 2017, Hill wrote a check for $50,000 to Political Committee 6, and on or about June 19, 2017, Khawaja sent $60,000 to Hill. Id. at 35 (Indictment ¶ 58m). Similarly, on or about January 19, 2018, Khawaja gave Hill $50,000, and on or about January 28, 2018, Hill wrote a $50,000 check to Political Committee 7 in connection with a private fundraiser for an elected official that...
To continue reading
Request your trial