[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF] Tuesday on two cases. In Ocasio v. US [transcript, PDF] the court heard arguments on whether [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] a conspiracy to commit extortion requires that the conspirators agree to obtain property from someone outside the conspiracy. The case involves a Baltimore police officer who was charged with conspiracy to extort for taking part in a kickback scheme with an auto repair shop. Samuel Ocasio and other officers encouraged [Reuters report] people involved in car accidents to get their cars repaired at Majestic Auto Repair Shop in exchange for the shop paying the police officers between $150 and $300 per referral. Ocasio’s attorneys argued that the legal definition of conspiracy does not include exchanges of money or property between co-conspirators, which was the case with Ocasio.

The court also heard arguments in DIRECTV v. Imburgia [transcript, PDF] on whether [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] the California Court of Appeals erred in holding that a reference to state law in an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) [text] requires the application of state law preempted by the FAA. In 2008 Amy Imburgia filed a class action lawsuit against DIRECTV over early termination fees. At that point the state appeals court ruled that class action arbitration in contracts were unenforceable. However in 2011 the Supreme Court decided in AT&T v. Concepcion [JURIST report] that the FAA preempts the state court ruling. DIRECTV moved to dismiss all of Imburgia’s claims and compel arbitration.