Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Proposition 8 and DOMA
On March 26 and 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in cases that give the Court an opportunity to render a definitive ruling on the right of same-sex couples to marry. In Perry v. Brown, 671 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.), cert. granted sub nom. Hollingsworth v. Perry, 133 S. Ct. 786 (2012), the Court agreed to hear the case in which lower courts struck down Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that' amended California's Constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. In Windsor v. United States, 699 F.3d 169 (2d Cir.), cert. granted, 133 S. Ct. 786 (2012), the Court agreed to hear one of several cases around the country in which lower courts struck down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which limits the definition of marriage to heterosexual unions for purposes of federal law. See DOMA ' 3 (codified at 1 U.S.C. ' 7).
But while the Court agreed to ' and did ' accept briefs and hear oral arguments in both Hollingsworth and Windsor, there is a possibility that the Justices will not weigh in on the merits of the same-sex marriage issue in either case. In both matters, the Justices asked the parties to brief and argue questions about the standing of the petitioners, and in Windsor, they also asked whether the Court even has jurisdiction under Article III of the Constitution to determine the case. Then, when counsel appeared before the Court in March, the Justices insisted on hearing arguments that addressed the standing issue before they would take argument on the merits. If ' as some believe will happen ' the Justices decide that the petitioners have no standing, or if they determine that the Court has no jurisdiction, there would be no ruling on the merits concerning the constitutionality of Proposition 8 or DOMA when decisions are handed down in June. That, in turn, would let stand the lower court rulings that struck down Proposition 8 and DOMA as unconstitutional.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.