Prosecutors Drop Soccer Bribery Case Against Former Fox Executive

The lawsuit is the result of one of the biggest investigations by the U.S. Justice Department into corruption in international soccer. This investigation started over ten years ago. The fight is between Hernan Lopez, the former CEO of Fox International Channels, and Full Play Group SA, a South American company that sells sports media rights. In 2023, a federal jury in Brooklyn found both of them guilty of wire fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering for trying to bribe soccer officials to get broadcast rights for big tournaments like the Copa Libertadores and World Cup qualifying matches. Prosecutors said that the defendants rigged the bidding process and paid CONMEBOL officials millions of dollars in bribes to get exclusive TV contracts and secret information about bids for global events.

Despite the convictions, the case has undergone a dizzying series of legal twists. After the 2023 jury verdict, a federal judge granted a motion for acquittal in 2024, finding that the honest services wire fraud statute did not clearly apply to foreign commercial bribery. However, in mid-2025 an appeals court reinstated the convictions, adding another layer of legal complexity. The government appealed that reinstatement to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to consider the matter. In a filing to the high court, prosecutors asked that the appeals court decision be reversed and that the case be sent back to the lower court so it could be dismissed entirely in the interests of justice.

In their motion, U.S. Attorney Joseph Nocella Jr. and his office emphasized that years of litigation, shifting legal standards and evolving interpretations of corruption law have made continued prosecution impractical. The Supreme Court filing argued that the legal foundation of the case had shifted substantially since the original indictments in the mid-2010s, and that the government’s ongoing pursuit no longer served the goals of fairness and justice. While prosecutors did not spell out every factor behind their recommendation to dismiss the charges, they noted that recent precedents have narrowed the scope of statutes that prosecutors historically used to pursue foreign bribery cases, making convictions more difficult to sustain.

Lopez, who has maintained his innocence throughout the long ordeal, welcomed the government’s decision. In a statement released shortly after the motion was made public, he described the original charges as “baseless from the start” and said he was grateful for an end to years of legal uncertainty. He also thanked supporters and his legal team for standing by him and his family through prolonged litigation. Full Play Group, which had also been implicated in the bribery scheme, declined to comment through its legal representatives.

Lawyers say that the soccer bribery case got a lot of attention because it was linked to FIFA and other sports regulatory bodies, but also because it showed how hard it is for prosecutors to use U.S. corruption laws on business dealings that happen outside of the U.S. The 2015 Justice Department investigation that led to more than 40 indictments said that officials from different federations got at least $150 million in bribes and payoffs in exchange for media rights and power. As sports television rights became more valuable, U.S. officials paid close attention to claims of illegal payments and deals made in secret.

The government has changed its mind, but the bigger investigation into corruption in international soccer has already led to several convictions and cooperation agreements from FIFA and other organizations' executives and officials. Alejandro Burzaco, an Argentine expert in sports marketing who worked with U.S. authorities and gave detailed accounts of large-scale bribery schemes involving major broadcasters and marketing businesses, was one of the most important witnesses in that investigation. Burzaco's help made it possible to build a case against a number of defendants, such as Lopez and Full Play. It also showed how far the investigation had gone around the world.

The decision to seek dismissal now makes us wonder how changing legal standards and prosecutorial goals will affect cases like this in the future. People who don't like the government's motion say it could send mixed messages about holding people accountable for corruption in international sports, especially when high-level executives and companies are involved. Some people say that the law has changed a lot since then and that going back to behavior from decades ago under current laws may not be the best use of limited prosecutorial resources. People are still arguing in courtrooms and policy circles about the best way to use anti-bribery rules in global markets.

Lawyers, prosecutors, and defense attorneys will all be very interested in what the Supreme Court decides about whether or not to grant the government's request. If the top court agrees to send the case back to a lower court to be thrown out, prosecutors may get what they call a 'appropriate resolution. But if the court upholds the convictions or makes it clearer how important corruption laws are, the effects could go beyond this case. This kind of choice could change how U.S. law deals with cases of bribery and business wrongdoing that happen outside of the U.S.

Lawyers say that the government's choice could also change how international sports groups handle compliance in the future. As media rights become one of the most profitable parts of global sports, regulators may feel more and more pressure to improve their systems for keeping an eye on things and update their laws against corruption. Experts say that the case's outcome, whether it ends or goes on, will likely change how companies make future broadcasting deals, how federations keep an eye on money transfers, and how prosecutors choose which cross-border financial crimes to focus on. As sports around the world keep growing, these changes make it even more important for the long-term health of the industry to have ethical governance.

During the time the issue is in court, both sides will presumably file more briefs, obtain support from friends, and make appeals that could influence how the Supreme Court sees the case. The soccer corruption investigation's bigger legacy still affects how football regulatory authorities and corporate partners handle the contradiction between moral duties and business objectives. No matter what happens with the case, it has already had a major effect on how people follow anti-bribery legislation and on sports all across the world.

Understanding the Shift in the High-Profile Soccer Bribery Case

The government's request to dismiss shows that the laws against corruption are changing and that prosecutors are changing what they look into. Officials say that the case should not go on because it has taken a long time because of appeals and other legal issues. They say that firing someone is the best way to do the right thing. This case shows that changing the rules of the courts could affect international investigations that have been going on for a long time. It also shows how important it is to have clear rules when going after complicated business bribery schemes that cross state lines.

People who are watching think that the Supreme Court's decision could change the way other countries handle bribery cases in the future and help them understand how U.S. law works when it comes to business crimes in other countries. If the court agrees with the government's case, it could make rules against corruption in other countries less strict and make lawmakers think twice about how they write laws. Lawyers say that judges might pay more attention to cases that are similar to show what prosecutors can't do. In the future, these things might change how governments, sports teams, and media companies around the world deal with corruption.