Whether pressuring a construction contractor to enter into a union contract meets the definition of generic extortion such that a racketeering act premised on a State extortion statute for that conduct can serve as a racketeering conspiracy predicate

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether pressuring a construction contractor to enter into a union contract meets the definition of generic extortion such that a racketeering act premised on a State extortion statute for that conduct can serve as a racketeering conspiracy predicate pursuant to this Court’s decisions in Scheidler v. National Organization for Women Inc., 537 U.S. 393 (2003), and Sekhar v. United States, 570 U.S. 729 (2013), holding that the object of a generic extortion racketeering predicate under State law must be transferable and obtainable property, and that mere coercion can not serve as a racketeering predicate.