BOSTON (LN) — U.S. District Judge Margaret R. Guzman granted the government's motion for reconsideration and entered a forfeiture money judgment against Scott, ruling that forfeiture is mandatory under federal law for violations of 29 U.S.C. § 501(c), the statute under which Scott pleaded guilty.
Scott was sentenced May 1, 2026, to 42 months of probation with the first six months on home detention and ordered to pay restitution of $49,559.63 to the union. The court denied the government's forfeiture request at that time, stating it preferred to prioritize making the victim whole through restitution.
The government filed its motion to correct the judgment six days later, arguing forfeiture was mandatory and that Scott had proper notice through the indictment and subsequent filings.
In her May 22 order, Guzman acknowledged her initial denial was erroneous. The court found that because Scott's indictment included forfeiture notice and he pleaded guilty to an offense triggering mandatory forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the forfeiture could not be denied based on concerns about "double recovery."
The court rejected Scott's arguments that he lacked notice and that the forfeiture should be offset against restitution, citing precedent from multiple circuit courts holding that district courts lack discretion to withhold mandatory forfeiture on equitable grounds.
The forfeiture order of $49,500 will be included criminal judgment. Scott was also ordered to pay a $100 special assessment.