Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Keeping an Eye on the Federal Civil Money Laundering Statute
After the adoption in 1986 of the Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA), 18 U.S.C. ” 1956-1957, money laundering quickly became, to borrow Judge Learned Hand's phrase, another darling of the modern federal prosecutor's nursery. Every year, federal prosecutors file many hundreds of criminal money laundering cases. The charge can appear in a dizzyingly wide array of contexts, as the MLCA's definition of the necessary underlying “specified unlawful activity,” or SUA, extends to literally hundreds of different crimes.
Given the intense focus on money laundering over the past 25 years, it is perhaps surprising that one enforcement tool handed to the Department of Justice (DOJ) by the original MLCA has lain virtually dormant. Under 18 U.S.C. ' 1956(b), the United States is empowered to seek civil penalties for violations of the federal money laundering laws. Those penalties can be quite considerable. Yet, outside a few well-publicized settlements in the 1990s with financial institutions for allegedly laundering Mexican drug trafficking money, the DOJ historically has made little use of the MLCA's civil penalty provisions.
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
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.
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.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
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.