Rick HasenVerified account

b(2) does not come into play in a Don Jr. prosecution and focus on b(1) solves overbreadth problem

If I were Don Jr's lawyer, I'd be VERY happy if the govt conceded it had to prove (b)(1)/(b)(1). But overbreadth deals with whole breadth.

The argument you're making about 22 U.S.C. § 611(b) would divide up the *definitional* section of that statute.

I've gone back to Part IV.B of the Fallon article, which makes clear that if there are logical divisions for severability, no facial attack

Severability when court "can identify a particular, precise way of severing the statute that cures the defect of substantial overbreadth"

Also bear in mind that the core issue is overbreadth of the definition of "thing of value," which appears elsewhere outside 30121.