Federal appeals court upholds conviction of Householder in public corruption case

Yahoo

06-05-2025

Former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder (Photo by: WEWS/WCPO.)
A panel of federal court judges has upheld the convictions of former House Speaker Larry Householder and former Republican leader Matt Borges for their roles in the largest public corruption scheme in state history.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the jury was correct in finding Householder guilty of racketeering and accepting a $61 million bribe in exchange for legislation to give utility company FirstEnergy a $1 billion bailout, named H.B. 6, at the expense of taxpayers.
The court also found that the jury was justified in finding Borges guilty in his role in the scandal, including attempting to bribe an FBI informant with $15,000 before threatening to blow his house up.
'Because each defendant's arguments fail, we uphold their convictions,' the court wrote.
In March 2023, a jury found that Householder and former GOP leader Matt Borges, beyond a reasonable doubt, participated in the racketeering scheme that left four men guilty, with another dead by suicide.
In late June of that year, federal Judge Timothy Black sentenced Householder to 20 years in prison. Borges got five years. The two surviving defendants — Jeff Longstreth and Juan Cespedes — took plea agreements early on in exchange for helping the FBI, and are still awaiting their sentencing. The feds are asking for a maximum of six months for them.
At the end of 2023, the former chairman of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Sam Randazzo, pleaded not guilty after being charged with a dozen crimes related to bribery and embezzlement after he allegedly received more than $4.3 million from FirstEnergy. The utility company has already admitted to bribery.
In April 2024, Randazzo became the second defendant accused in the scandal to die by suicide. Neil Clark, a lobbyist who was accused of bribery, killed himself after pleading not guilty in 2021.
Householder's attorney Scott Pullins, sent WEWS/OCJ the following statement:
'Today is a sad and disappointing day for Mr. Householder, Mr. Borges, and their families and supporters. But it is even a sadder day for constitutional free speech and the rule of law.
Mr. Householder, like former Ohio Speakers Cliff Rosenberger and Ryan Smith, and current Speaker Matt Huffman, raised undisclosed, unlimited donations for a 501c4 organization that supported him and his political allies. But the federal government singled only Mr. Householder out for prosecution.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
In the H.B. 6 matter, Mr. Householder led one House in the legislative branch of state government. To pass H.B. 6, it required the support of former Senate President Larry Obhof and his chamber, along with the support of Governor Mike DeWine and Lt. Governor Jon Husted. All received undisclosed, corporate donations from First Energy and worked closely with them to pass H.B. 6. But the federal government singled only Mr. Householder out for prosecution.
After reading the P.G. Sittenfeld case, and now this decision, it has become clear that the Sixth Circuit believes that the Supreme Court must act to clarify the law more clearly around political donations and bribery. We hope and fervently pray that they will do so. Free speech must apply equally to all and cannot be left to the whims and egos of individual U.S. attorneys.'
The decision — Householder
Going through each of Householder's arguments, the appellate judges swiftly dismissed the claims.
'The evidence showed that Householder agreed to commit —and did commit — extortion and honest services fraud …' the decision states. 'The jurors also heard no shortage of evidence that the conspirators knew that they were doing wrong.'
The court lambasted Householder for arguing he didn't commit a crime.
'What's more, Householder tried to conceal his tracks along the way. It began with the web of secret 501(c)(4) entities. He tried to cajole another representative into deleting text messages about House Bill 6. He deleted his call logs with Yost during the referendum saga,'
And he gave 'unequivocally false' testimony, according to the district court, the appellate judges said.
'In sum, Householder committed multiple RICO predicates when he solicited and received payments from FirstEnergy in exchange for specific official action,' the court decision stated.
What about when it comes to the former speaker's point of view?
'Householder offers a slate of arguments to the contrary,' the appeals court wrote. 'They fail.'
The appellate judges detailed how the former speaker did, indeed, commit crimes, and the jury was well aware of all the dinners he went to, money he accepted, and scare tactics he used to try to keep people quiet.
Householder, in his appeal, said it wasn't fair that audio recordings of him were played in court because they were 'irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial.'
In a recording obtained by WEWS/OCJ, Householder threatened state Reps. Dave Greenspan and Scott Lipps, who didn't support him, saying: 'If you're going to f— with me, I'm going to f— with your kids.'
This deeply disturbed jury foreman Jarrod Haines, who did an exclusive interview following the trial.
Due to the fact that the defense did not object to these recordings being played during the trial, and because they clearly meet the standard of admittance, the appellate judges wrote that 'Householder's unpalatable language aligned with lots of evidence that the jury received of Householder and his co-conspirators' foul language. These recordings wouldn't have unduly prejudiced him.'
It was clear during the trial that Householder's attorneys were going to use judicial bias in the appeals process.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Black, a Democrat nominated by former President Barack Obama in 2009, has been in the legal profession for more than four decades. He got his first spot on the bench in 1994, joining the Hamilton County Municipal Court. During his ten-year tenure on the trial court, he decided to run for a seat on the Ohio Supreme Court in 2000.
This campaign was brought up 22 or so years later by Householder's attorney Mark Marein before the jury entered the room during the trial. The Cleveland-based lawyer argued that the judge doesn't like them. 'We all collectively believe that the court holds animosity toward us,' Marein said. 'I question whether (Black) should be presiding over this.'
Black said he clearly didn't have bias. Householder said this wasn't true, adding that he received the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. The appellate court agreed with Black.
It also wasn't fair that the court found Householder to have committed perjury, Householder's attorneys said.
The decision — Borges
The court found that Borges was aware of the crimes he committed.
'There is ample evidence that Borges knew and agreed to facilitate the illegal activity involved in the Householder enterprise,' the appellate judges wrote.
Jury foreman Haines said he kept an open mind the entire trial, but the overwhelming amount of evidence was undeniable, he said. Borges was easier for the jury to decide on, according to Haines.
Whistleblower Tyler Fehrman testified that Borges tried to bribe him, and the FBI had the video.
'It was just kind of an 'a-ha' moment,' Haines said of Fehrman's testimony. 'It was key for him to take the stand, for sure.'
This included a jarring quote from Borges telling the whistleblower that if he told anyone about the bribe, he would 'blow up' his house.
Borges was part of the scheme due to his role in the referendum effort to repeal H.B. 6. The beneficiaries of H.B. 6 knew that citizens wanted it gone, since they didn't want to increase their bills for a failing company, details of the trial laid out. Borges, as proved in court, tried to bribe Fehrman to give details on the repeal effort.
Borges argued that testimony by several witnesses was prejudicial against him.
'Borges, for his part, argues that the evidence was unduly prejudicial because it conveyed 'gangster-style conduct that the average juror would associate with racketeering,'' the appellate court wrote. 'But such conclusory labels don't help his case.'
Moving forward
The judges encouraged the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit several cases that could help Householder's appeal — arguing that separate public corruption cases could cast doubt on the convictions due to differing legality, semantics and scope of what corruption is.
Meanwhile, Householder is attempting to get clemency, his attorney Scott Pullins told WEWS/OCJ after the November election.
'The justice system can be turned as a weapon against people for political purposes,' the lawyer said.
Householder's team believes that the FBI was politically motivated in arresting the former speaker.
This argument could appeal to the president, Case Western Reserve University criminal law professor Mike Benza said.
'One of the things that we know that President-elect (Donald) Trump is interested in is what he sees as political forces working in the Department of Justice, especially targeting Republicans,' Benza said.
Householder knows Trump well and spoke at the 2016 Republican National Convention. They kept in touch throughout the years, Pullins said.
Paula Christian from WCPO contributed to this story.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
This article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and is published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content-sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication by other news outlets as it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE