Legal Expert Explains Why Bezos Accusation Misses Federal Blackmail Standard
A Columbia law professor argues that the National Enquirer's alleged threat against Jeff Bezos does not actually meet the legal definition of blackmail or extortion under federal law. The specific statutes require the pursuit of money or tangible property, which Bezos was not asked to provide.
Jeff Bezos accuses the National Enquirer and its parent company, American Media Inc., of blackmail and extortion after they threaten to publish embarrassing photos unless he makes a public statement. While many people sympathize with Bezos and find the alleged behavior morally reprehensible, a Columbia law professor points out that the situation likely does not meet the strict definition of these federal crimes.
The federal blackmail statute specifically requires the perpetrator to seek "any money or other thing of value" from the victim. Because the Enquirer allegedly demands only a vague public affirmation rather than tangible property or financial gain, this defense shields the publication from this specific law. Additionally, case law establishes that revealing facts to cause reputational injury does not violate this statute if the action pursues a legitimate objective.
Similarly, the Hobbs Act defines extortion as obtaining property from another through wrongful use of fear or threats. Since Bezos faces a demand for an intangible statement rather than actual property, this federal extortion statute also fails to apply to the dispute. Consequently, even if every detail of Bezos's account is completely true, the alleged actions do not constitute federal blackmail or extortion.