Follow Us
Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Business has gone global. So too has business-related crime. In the interconnected business environment, white-collar criminal investigations and prosecutions frequently present cross-border issues and affect U.S. foreign relations. Indeed, in some recent high-profile cases, the Trump administration has implied that it sees law enforcement — or the lack of it — as one of the tools in its foreign policy arsenal. Allowing these foreign relations implications to influence the prosecutions of individuals would seem to violate our notions of fairness and due process. Because corporate criminal enforcement, however, is far more regulatory or policy-oriented in nature, foreign relations perhaps can be seen as a legitimate consideration in such criminal prosecution decisions.
By Joseph F. Savage Jr. and Christopher J.C. Herbert
In an environment of aggressive federal prosecution and regulation both businesses and public officials are challenged to identify the permissible line between proper financial transactions — things like campaign contributions and business entertainment — and unlawful payments. And, in what the First Circuit called a “novel theory of Hobbs Act extortion,” public officials now have to struggle with the scope of permissible advocacy — when does advocacy for constituents become extortion?
Supreme Court’s October Term 2018 Contains Hints of Things to Come
By Harry Sandick and Tara Norris
Part One of a Two-Part Article
In its recently ended October Term 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided several notable criminal law decisions that will have a meaningful impact on white-collar practitioners’ work and, importantly, offer clues regarding the movement of the criminal law in subsequent terms. In this two-part article, we review several of the key decisions and consider their implications, both for practitioners in this area and for Court-watchers interested in future Court decisions.
SEC’s Reboot on Waiver Requests in Enforcement Settlements
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
SEC Chairman Jay Clayton recently announced a change in how the SEC will consider requests for waivers of certain serious collateral consequences that would otherwise result from settlement of an SEC enforcement action. These collateral consequences, often referred to as “bad actor” or “bad boy” provisions, can vary greatly and may disqualify an entity from conducting certain business or utilizing certain means to offer securities.
By Juliet Gunev
Canadian Clean Fuel Technology Company and Former CEO Pay $4.1 Million to Settle China Related FCPA Case
Copyright © ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
