Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
SCOTUS: Courts Should Avoid Assigning 'Breathtaking' Scope to White-Collar Crime Statutes
"The Supreme Court's message is unmistakable: Courts should not assign federal criminal statutes a 'breathtaking' scope when a narrower reading is reasonable." See, United States v. Dubin, 27 F.4th 1021, 1041 (5th Cir. 2022) (Costa, J., dissenting). So began the powerful dissent of Judge Gregg Costa, joined by six of his U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit colleagues sitting en banc, which presaged the U.S. Supreme Court's June 8, 2023, unanimous reversal in Dubin v. United States, 143 S. Ct. 1557 (2023). The dissenters then cited a string of Supreme Court criminal law decisions, many previously discussed by these authors, illustrating that the Court's delivery of that message was "nearly an annual event," and observed that not "once this century" has the Court adopted the "government's broad reading … for a white collar/regulatory criminal statute." Dubin, 27 F.4th at 1041. In its ruling in Dubin, the Supreme Court forcefully continued the trend recognized by Costa, rejecting the government's literalist view of 18 U.S.C. Section 1028A(a)(1) that would make virtually every low-level fraud by a healthcare provider into aggravated identify theft subject to a mandatory two-year prison sentence.
Though it has garnered less attention than this term's unanimous Ciminelli decision rejecting the "right to control" theory of wire fraud, Dubin is significant in itself. Prosecutors regularly use the "Aggravated identity theft" statute, 18 U.S.C. Section 1028A(a)(1), and the breadth of the government's prior interpretation, combined with its mandatory minimum sentence, made the law a powerful tool to induce guilty pleas in fraud cases. The courts' struggle to derive a principled narrowing of the statute, culminating in the Supreme Court's adoption of a rule requiring that a defendant's use of a means of identification be "at the crux of what makes the conduct criminal" is also an interesting study in criminal statutory interpretation. Practitioners may want to consider opportunities to apply Dubin's rationale in other criminal law contexts. In some notable cases, counsel already have begun doing so.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
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.
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.
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.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.