Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review his conviction on multiple federal corruption charges, a move that comes three months after a federal appeals court upheld his sentence.

Madigan’s legal team filed the petition on Wednesday, seeking the high court’s consideration of issues related to the scope of federal bribery laws applied in the case. The petition challenges key aspects of the prosecution’s theory, including whether certain actions—such as recommending appointments—constitute official acts under the law.

The case dates back to a lengthy trial last year, during which Madigan was found guilty on 10 counts of bribery conspiracy and additional charges connected to a scheme involving utility company ComEd. Prosecutors alleged Madigan used his political influence to secure no-show subcontracts for his associates, funneling more than $3 million in financial benefits to close allies. The jury also convicted him on six of seven other charges, including wire fraud and violations of the Travel Act, connected to an arrangement involving former Alderman Daniel Solis. In that scheme, Madigan purportedly sought to have Solis appointed to a state board to generate business for Madigan’s private law practice.

Madigan, who turned 84 this year, was sentenced in June 2025 to seven and a half years in federal prison. He reported to a medium-security federal facility in Morgantown, West Virginia, four months after sentencing. His current release date is set for early 2032.

In April, a unanimous three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Madigan’s conviction. The court described the evidence as “overwhelming,” stating that Madigan had used nearly a decade of public service to benefit political allies financially. The panel emphasized the extensive nature of the scheme involving ComEd and noted the serious breaches of public trust.

Madigan’s defense argues that the prosecution’s interpretation of bribery law is overly broad, potentially criminalizing typical interactions between elected officials and constituents. The petition asserts that the government’s “novel bribery theories” could chill lawful political activities and require the Supreme Court to clarify applicable legal standards.

Requests for comment from Madigan’s legal representatives have not been returned. The Supreme Court’s decision whether to hear the case is pending.