Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Trump administration’s shift in enforcement policy away from foreign corruption and towards the fight against Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) such as drug cartels, a shift that adds a spate of new designations of cartels as terrorist groups, may reduce the immediate risk to global businesses of an FCPA prosecution based on alleged extortion payments.
However, the same shift raises new threats to those businesses under statutes, including the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), that prohibit engagement of any kind with terrorist organizations, do not recognize an extortion defense, and may give rise to civil as well as criminal liability.
Businesses operating in environments where they are subject to demands for “protection” payments or other extortionate threats must investigate carefully and maintain strong compliance programs to minimize prosecution and litigation risks.
President Donald Trump has indicated his intent to use the ATA and related statutes in addition to existing tools to combat cartels and other TCOs, even while he has deprioritized FCPA enforcement. In one of his first actions after inauguration, President Trump signed an executive order directing the State Department to designate cartels and other TCOs as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs). See, EO 14157 (Jan. 20, 2025).
On Feb. 20, 2025, the State Department designated eight TCOs, including organizations with significant operations in Mexico, Central America, and Venezuela, as FTOs and SDGTs pursuant to the Executive Order. 90 Fed. Reg. 10030 (Feb. 20, 2025).
On Feb. 5, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memorandum, “Total Elimination of Cartels and Transnational Criminal Organizations,” that directed the Department of Justice’s FCPA enforcement efforts to “prioritize investigations related to foreign bribery that facilitates the criminal operations of Cartels and TCOs, and shift focus away from investigations and cases that do not involve such a connection.”
Five days later, Trump issued an executive order directing that the Department of Justice (DOJ) “cease initiation of any new FCPA investigations or enforcement actions, unless the attorney general determines that an individual exception should be made.” EO 14207 (Feb. 10, 2025). It appears likely that any exceptions granted by the attorney general will relate to cases with a connection to cartels or TCOs, particularly those that are subject to FTO/SDGT designation.
Organized crime and threats of extortion or other harm have long been major concerns for companies operating in Latin America, where security-related expenses and losses due to crime impose considerable financial burdens. According to a 2024 survey by the American Chamber of Commerce Mexico, which polls its member companies:
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?