US Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) filed a motion on Wednesday, calling on US District Judge Sidney Stein to dismiss charges alleging that he conspired to act as a foreign agent of Egypt. The charges arose from an indictment last October, accusing Menendez of endorsing the interests of several businessmen and the Egyptian government in return for alleged “bribes.” Menendez had previously pleaded not guilty to these charges.
The dismissal motion delineated two grounds. The first pertained to the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure (FRCP) 12(b)(3), which addresses pretrial motions a defendant can put forth under specific circumstances. It did not reveal the particular defense used.
The second and main contention from Menendez’s defense focused on FRCP 7(d). This rule allows courts to purge surplusage, which are unnecessary or irrelevant language, from the accusation. The senator’s legal argument claimed that the indictment’s allegations contradicted the Speech and Debate Clause of the US Constitution. According to this clause, congressional staff hold immunity from criminal prosecutions or civil lawsuits arising from acts undertaken within the legislative sphere. Menendez argued for the removal of alleged acts taking place within this immune “legislative sphere” from the indictment.
In an accompanying memorandum, Menendez’s attorneys labeled the charges against their client as “outrageously false” and an attempt to manipulate reality. This document laid out specific defenses for each charge in the indictment. US officials who brought about the charges have yet to comment on the motion or memorandum.
The October indictment was modified by a superseding indictment in January, which added allegations of Menendez conspiring with agents from Qatar along with those from Egypt. No new charges were brought forward due to these supplementary allegations.