The Supreme Court on Thursday threw out the convictions of two key players in the so-called Bridgegate case that rocked the administration of former New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie.

In a unanimous opinion, written by Justice Elena Kagan, the high court threw out the convictions of former Christie aide Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Baroni, the deputy executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which controls the George Washington bridge.

A federal court jury had in 2016 returned guilty verdicts against the pair, concluding they shut down two of three bridge lanes coming out of Fort Lee, New Jersey, to punish its mayor for refusing to endorse Christie’s re-election.

The Supreme Court’s decision Thursday, however, did not come as a surprise. When the case was argued earlier this year, it was clear that many justices thought the prosecutors went too far, since the two officials charged did not benefit financially from closing the bridge lanes.

The case stemmed from the Bridgegate scandal that created monumental traffic jams in 2013 on the George Washington Bridge and tarnished Christie’s image.

“The question presented is whether the defendants committed property fraud. The evidence the jury heard no doubt shows wrongdoing—deception, corruption, abuse of power,” the justices wrote in their opinion. “But the federal fraud statutes at issue do not criminalize all such conduct. Under settled precedent, the officials could violate those laws only if an object of their dishonesty was to obtain the Port Authority’s money or property. The Government contends it was … We disagree.”

The justices wrote that “the realignment of the toll lanes was an exercise of regulatory power—something this Court has already held fails to meet the statutes’ property requirement.”

“And the employees’ labor was just the incidental cost of that regulation, rather than itself an object of the officials’ scheme. We therefore reverse the convictions,” they wrote.

In January, when the case was argued, several of the justices appeared to be skeptical of the prosecution’s theory of the case — that the two committed fraud by lying about their reason for closing the bridge. Kelly and Baroni had said they needed to conduct a study of traffic patterns, but a jury found that the real reason was to punish the mayor of a community served by the bridge who refused to endorse the Republican governor’s re-election.

The justices also seemed concerned that if the court upheld the convictions, it would open the door to charging any public official with fraud by asserting that he or she lied in claiming to act in the public interest. That might include a city official who orders potholes repaired to reward the mayor’s political base while justifying it on policy grounds.

Kelly and Baroni had been sentenced to prison for their role in the scheme. Kelly was to report in the summer but has been allowed to remain free while the case is on appeal. Baroni began serving his sentence in April but was released on bond when the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.