U.S. Supreme Court justices hearing a closely watched insider trading case indicated on Wednesday they were likely to make it easier for prosecutors to pursue such charges against traders, but questioned where to draw the line. The appeal by Bassam Salman, an Illinois man convicted after making nearly $1.2 million trading on information that came from his brother-in-law, was the first insider trading case to come before the justices in 2 decades.

Several justices appeared skeptical about Salman's stance that he could not be convicted and later sentenced to 3 years in prison for trading on information about deals involving clients of Citigroup where the brother-in-law worked.  Alexandra Shapiro, Salman's lawyer, contended prosecutors in insider trading cases must prove that an alleged source of corporate secrets, like the brother-in-law, received a tangible benefit like cash in exchange for any tips.

A majority of the justices appeared ready to uphold Salman's 2013 conviction on conspiracy and securities fraud charges, asking why someone providing inside information as a no-charge gift to a family member could not be found to have benefited.  "You certainly benefit from giving to your family," Justice Anthony Kennedy said. "It ennobles you, and in a sense ... it helps you financially because you make them more secure."  Justice Elena Kagan suggested that adopting the position advocated by Salman, 57, would overturn decades of legal principle that had helped protect the markets' integrity.  "You're asking us essentially to change the rules in a way that threatens that integrity," Kagan said.