On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court grappled with the definition of a “crime of violence” in the case of a New York Mob bookie who claims his conviction for arranging the attempted murder of a rival should be overturned, arguing that his foiled plot did not involve physical force.
Salvatore “Fat Sal” Delligatti, an associate of the Genovese Crime Family, is at the center of this legal debate. Delligatti, sentenced to 25 years in prison in 2018 for various crimes including racketeering and attempted murder, is not challenging these convictions. Rather, he contests the related charge of “possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence,” which added an extra five years to his sentence.
In 2014, Delligatti enlisted members of the Crips gang to kill a rival gangster, a move aimed at protecting his illegal sports betting business. He provided the would-be assassins with a .38 revolver and a getaway car. However, law enforcement, with Delligatti’s phone under surveillance, thwarted the plan. The gang members were intercepted just blocks from their intended target in Queens.
The core of Delligatti’s argument is not about the violence of his crime but about whether murder necessarily involves physical force. His lawyer, Allon Kedem, contended that a crime could morally be considered reprehensible without involving violence. Kedem illustrated his point by differentiating between direct physical force, such as a kick or punch, and indirect actions like pushing someone off a cliff, and actions of inaction, like failing to help someone in need.
Some justices seemed intrigued by this perspective, exploring various hypotheticals involving lifeguards neglecting children they disliked and old ladies falling into open manholes, while others remained skeptical. Justice Amy Coney Barrett found the argument counterintuitive, suggesting it was odd to claim that murder is not a crime of violence. Justice Samuel Alito pointedly questioned whether Delligatti could be considered anything other than the type of armed career criminal Congress aimed to penalize with this statute.
The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision, anticipated by summer 2025, is expected to provide much-needed clarity to lower federal courts on the application of the “possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence” charge.
