They didn’t do that. They ruled that gratuities and bribes are two different kinds of corruption that require different proof and are made illegal under different laws.
Seems odd to attack my news sources, as if you know which ones I use instead of the argument itself. Under no circumstance should a Judge accept money from anyone even remotely involved in any case. It doesn't matter what they call it after.
For example, this helpful primer on the “differences between the offense of bribery and the offense of accepting a gratuity” was last updated in 1998: https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...
You should consider reading legal news that doesn’t lie to your face.