Expert Analysis

• High Court Ruling Casts Doubt On Status-Based Gun Bans

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Hemani demonstrates that the justices are increasingly skeptical of broad theories of categorical disarmament and clarifies that dangerousness cannot simply be presumed from one's status or membership in a statutory category, such as illegal drug use, says Lee Francis at Widener Law.

• Data Reveals Pivot In Feds' Financial Fraud Priorities

  

  Recent Justice Department data shows fraud prosecutions fell to their lowest rate in a decade in 2025, illustrating a move away from traditional financial cases and toward a targeted mix of healthcare, government program, consumer and sanctions matters, say Paul Hinton and Adrienna Huffman at The Brattle Group.

• New Timeline For Benefits Cases May Increase FCA Litigation

  

  Recent reforms designed to speed enforcers’ intervention decisions in False Claims Act suits involving state-administered benefits will likely encourage more qui tam relators to litigate cases without the government’s imprimatur, and increase defendants’ discovery burdens, defense costs and business disruptions, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Why Highly Specialized Experts May Risk Exclusion At Trial

  

  Expert witnesses with highly specific areas of focus may be vulnerable to exclusion in court, making it important for attorneys to check how potential witnesses' qualifications can be bolstered by their publications and other professional activities, say Evan Weisberg and Christopher Cunio at Hunton, and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• DOJ Shifts Raise Ethics Questions For White Collar Defense

  

  Recent shifts in U.S. Department of Justice clemency and charge-dismissal practices create ethical gray areas for white collar defense attorneys, who should follow risk-mitigating best practices while still forcefully advocating for their clients, says Kenneth Notter at MoloLamken.

• A Midyear Look At Antiterrorism Act Jurisprudence And Policy

  

  Plaintiffs have filed comparably fewer new actions under the Antiterrorism Act this year, though a handful of key decisions further defined the statute’s aiding-and-abetting standard and highlighted continuing risks for financial services companies, say attorneys at Skadden.

• Justices' Obstruction Ruling Clears Venue-Challenge Path

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Abouammo v. U.S. poses venue challenges for federal obstruction of justice prosecutions, it is a gift for defense counsel because it offers a clean, constitutional basis to challenge venue where a place of falsification and a place of investigation diverge, says Liz Aloi at MoFo.

• Drawing A Line Between Settlement Pressure And Extortion

  

  U.S. v. Luo, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, may force courts to address anew when settlement negotiations become criminal extortion, particularly in the age of easily fabricated digital evidence, says attorney Denis Kiely.

• Responding To US Labeling Brazilian Gangs As Terrorist Orgs

  

  The Trump administration's recent designation of two Brazilian criminal organizations as foreign terrorists affects companies in multiple sectors that must now assess their exposure and enhance their sanctions, know-your-customer and anti-money-laundering screening programs, say attorneys at King & Spalding.

• Wire Fraud Ruling May Upend White Collar Enforcement

  

  A Texas federal court’s recent decision in U.S. v. Garza, dismissing wire fraud charges arising from an alleged $1 billion tax shelter scheme, advances a broader constitutional principle that could affect sentencing and reshape charging practices across white collar criminal cases involving specialized statutory regimes, say attorneys at Benesch.

• Series

  Founding An Autism Academy Made Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Starting a nonprofit autism school with no building, no funding model and no guarantee that families would trust us taught me the importance of mission, patience and purpose — lessons that sharpened my practice and showed how meaningful work outside the office can make lawyers better, says Phillip Russell at Ogletree Deakins.

• How Justices' Habeas Ruling Limits Compassionate Release

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's recent holding in Fernandez v. U.S. that a federal prisoner who challenges their conviction's validity must do so through habeas, not compassionate release, considerably narrows the universe of arguments that can support a sentence reduction, says attorney Elizabeth Franklin-Best.

• Opinion

  Rule Of Law Requires Gov't Engagement With Bar, Not Retreat

  

  A federal agency's absence from national and local bar conferences, most recently illustrated by the U.S. Department of Justice's withdrawal from a New York City Bar Association white collar conference, disserves the bar, the government lawyers themselves and, ultimately, the administration of justice, says Muhammad Faridi at Linklaters.

• The Paradoxical Duty To Adopt AI When You Can't Bill For It

  

  Both billing for hours saved using artificial intelligence and preserving billable time by not adopting AI may violate rules of professional conduct, but until bar associations' ethics rules catch up to this emerging economic dilemma, firms must decide how to adjust fee structures themselves, says Ines Lassalle at Peyrot & Associates.

• Reel Justice: 'Tuner' And Modern Juror Sympathy

  

  In “Tuner,” the main character’s criminal behavior is framed as an extension of his vulnerability, talent and loyalty, demonstrating how narratives of sympathy shape perceptions of culpability, and why jurors may reinterpret wrongdoing through story and emotion rather than evidence and doctrine, says Veronica Finkelstein at WilmU Law.