In Sekhar v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that an attempt to compel a person to recommend that his employer approve an investment does not constitute "the obtaining of property from another" under the Hobbs Act. The case involved petitioner Giridhar Sekhar who was found guilty of attempted extortion for sending anonymous emails threatening to expose a New York State employee's extramarital affair unless he recommended approval of an investment in a fund managed by Sekhar’s company. The court held that while the recommendation could lead to tangible economic gain, it did not qualify as transferable property under the law and thus fell outside its scope. This decision overturned previous rulings by lower courts which had upheld Sekhar's conviction on these grounds.

In the dissenting opinion for Sekhar v. United States, Justice Scalia argued that attempting to compel a recommendation from an attorney does not constitute "obtaining property" under the Hobbs Act. He contended that while recommendations can have value, they are not transferrable and thus do not meet the definition of property as traditionally understood in extortion law. Furthermore, he stated that expanding this definition could lead to criminalizing other forms of coercion which were never intended by Congress when enacting this legislation. He also criticized the majority's reliance on past cases where intangible rights were considered property under RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) laws because those cases involved transferable economic interests rather than personal services like legal advice or a recommendation.