Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Prosecutors and federal agents are entrusted with broad and largely unchecked authority to conduct most aspects of their investigations. For example, they serve grand jury subpoenas that compel the production of evidence and witness testimony. They can conduct physical surveillance of subjects and even introduce undercover agents and confidential informants to them in order to build prosecutions. All of this can be done without any judicial approval. However, two of the most potent investigative tools that prosecutors and agents use to build their investigations — the search warrant and the Title III wiretap — do require judicial approval under the Fourth Amendment. As some commentators (including one of the authors of this article) have observed, search warrants and wiretaps were once used primarily to investigate organized crime, drug dealing and terrorism. In recent years, however, prosecutors have employed these tools increasingly in the context of white-collar crime to the point where it is now commonplace. See, Robert H. Hotz, Jr. & Harry Sandick, “Search Warrants in White-Collar Crime Cases,” The Review of Securities and Commodities Regulation, Vol. 45 No. 12 (June 20, 2012).
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
Common Pitfalls In Personal Device Collection
By Marjorie Peerce and Marguerite O’Brien
Both the DOJ and the SEC have made it clear that they will look at company BYOD policies when assessing how to resolve matters under their purview. To avoid pitfalls — and sanctions — counsel must take proactive steps to ensure proper preservation and collection of personal mobile data and verify that clients comply.
FCPA Compliance Guidance for Global Businesses
By Cole Callihan
The Biden administration and its Justice Department have established countering corruption as a core U.S. national security interest. Companies with any international operations should ensure they have a robust written policy and compliance program focused on anti-bribery and corruption.
Regulators Want AI Companies to Respect Antitrust and Consumer Protection Laws
By Karen Hoffman-Lent and Kenneth Schwartz
The new era of AI technology has ushered in competition concerns alongside consumer-protection fears. Accordingly, regulators and lawmakers are taking note of the AI craze and are keen on ensuring that companies involved in AI are respecting both antitrust and consumer protection laws.
Will the Corporate Transparency Act Smother the Cannabis Industry?
By Steve Schain
The CTA requires business entities to file information on their “beneficial owners” with FinCEN, which, in turn, may disclose it to domestic and foreign law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, judges and financial institutions.