The justices unanimously said a law prohibiting “any false statement or report” did not cover misleading assertions that fell short of outright lies.
The Supreme Court on Friday overturned a Chicago politician’s conviction for making statements to bank regulators that were misleading but not false.
The case concerned Patrick Daley Thompson, a former Chicago alderman who is the grandson of one former mayor, Richard J. Daley, and the nephew of another, Richard M. Daley. He conceded that he had misled the regulators but said that did not make his statements criminal.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for a unanimous court, said the case turned on elementary logic. The law in question prohibited making “any false statement or report.”
“False and misleading are two different things,” the chief justice wrote. “A misleading statement can be true. And a true statement is obviously not false. So basic logic dictates that at least some misleading statements are not false.”
The case, Thompson v. United States, No. 23-1095, started when Mr. Thompson took out three loans from Washington Federal Bank for Savings from 2011 to 2014. He used the first, for $110,000, to finance a law firm. He used the next loan, for $20,000, to pay a tax bill. He used the third, for $89,000, to repay a debt to another bank.
He made a single payment on the loans, for $390 in 2012. The bank, which did not press him for further payments, failed in 2017.