Whether an agency's receipt of information over which it has no authority to act implicates a 'matter within' the agency's jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1519

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioner was convicted of multiple federal crimes for filing a report with the Federal Election Commission that allegedly misstated the purpose of an expenditure. In particular, the government argued that payments listed as “audio/visual” expenses were in fact expenditures in exchange for securing the endorsement of a state politician. But federal law does not prohibit making payments in exchange for an endorsement. The Government nonetheless pursued and obtained criminal convictions against Petitioner under the federal obstruction statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1519, and the false-statements statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1001. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the convictions, in direct conflict with decisions from other circuits and recent decisions of this Court. The questions presented are: 1. Does an agency’s receipt of information over which it has no authority to act implicate a “matter within” the agency’s “jurisdiction” under 18 U.S.C. § 1519, as the Eighth Circuit held below in conflict with decisions from three other circuits? 2. Can a false statement be deemed “material” under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 even if the government would have acted no differently had the statement been true?