Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Part One, we discussed the public concern over unfairness in asset forfeiture and analyzed the Supreme Court case — United States v. Bajakajian — that looked to the Excessive Fines Clause to limit the government’s authority to forfeit property. In Part Two, we consider possible reforms that would allow defendants to challenge forfeitures as disproportionate under a fairer and more appropriate analysis.
In Part One of our article (last month), we discussed the public concern over unfairness in asset forfeiture and analyzed the Supreme Court case — United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321 (1998) — that looked to the Excessive Fines Clause to limit the government’s authority to forfeit property. We also explained that in the years since Bajakajian was decided, the decision has been invoked by the Circuit Courts of Appeal only rarely to block the government’s forfeiture claim. Why are there so few successful challenges to forfeiture under Bajakajian?
*May exclude premium content
By Steve Sozio, Rebecca Martin, Rajeev Muttreja and Mark Rotatori
With the federal government appropriating more than $2 trillion for businesses affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, plaintiffs’ lawyers, regulators and politicians have trumpeted the search for whistleblowers — many of whom will try to cash in on perceived fraud in the funding programs created by the CARES Act and other enactments.
By Carolyn H. Kendall
Compliance Programs Offer Companies an Opportunity to Mitigate Risk
This article outlines the principles of corporate criminal liability, including the factors prosecutors consider when making charging decisions, and the potentially available sanctions in light of applicable U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and offers strategies for minimizing risk, including lessons from recent criminal enforcement actions.
By Daniel R. Alonso, Preston Burton and Meredith Leeson
IGs have been part of the federal landscape for more than 40 years, so why all the fuss now? The answer is that they are a key element of the government’s built-in mechanisms for protecting the nation’s public treasury, and a relief package of this scope strongly indicates that the IGs and the new oversight bodies will spend many years scrutinizing funds spent under it.
By Christopher M. Ferguson
This article discusses what tools the government has for pursuing seemingly undeserving PPP borrowers, the obstacles to bringing such cases, and the factors that may influence the government’s decision in pursuing criminal or civil cases.