"Using a bait-and-switch tactic, a detective posing as [eighteen-year-old] Amber chatted and flirted with DeMare online and via text message for four days as an adult before revealing on the fifth day that she was actually a minor."
Former federal judge Michael Luttig thinks that the D.C. Circuit did not really understand what was at stake.
A former federal judge (and Supreme Court short-lister) on what Judge Emmett Sullivan (and his critics) got right, and got wrong
A new paper by Thomas Frampton suggests most recent commentary concerning the Michael Flynn prosecution gets it wrong.
No, the Supreme Court's "Bridgegate" Decision Doesn't Vindicate Trump on Impeachment [Updated with Comment on Josh Blackman's Clarification of his Position]
An abuse of power that doesn't violate federal fraud statutes can still be an impeachable offense - and still violate other criminal law.
Our Amicus Brief Urging the Supreme Court to Consider Takings Case in Which Authorities Refused to Compensate Innocent Owners of House Destroyed by Police
The brief was filed by the Cato Institute on behalf of both Cato and myself.
Kansas “will not wholly exonerate a defendant on the ground that his illness prevented him from recognizing his criminal act as morally wrong.”
Under the law, prosecutors are supposed to pursue justice and not only seek convictions.
Institute for Justice Takes up Case where Federal Court Ruled Government Owes no Compensation to Innocent Property Owner Whose House was Destroyed By Police
The prominent libertarian public interest firm hopes to get the decision reversed, possibly by the Supreme Court.
The ruling is a continuation of the same case in which the federal Supreme Court ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment is "incorporated" against state governments and applies to asset forfeitures.
Where does Congress get the authority to redundantly criminalize abuse of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles?
Federal Court Rules State Judges Cannot Profit From Fines and Fees Imposed on Defendants in the Cases Before Them
If the court that hears the cases stands to profit from the fines paid by defendants, that's a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Constitution. The rulings have potential implications for other, similar conflicts of interest in the criminal justice system.
Yes, in many states, under the "proximate cause" theory of "felony murder."
If You Oppose Punishing and Deporting Undocumented Workers, You Should Also Oppose Punishing Employers that Hire Them
Punishing employers is unjust for many of the same reasons as punishing the workers. And doing so harms the workers, too.
Lawsuit Challenges Ordinance Requiring Eviction of Entire "Household" if One Member Has Committed a Crime
The case was brought on the family's behalf by the Institute for Justice, a prominent public interest law firm.
Plus: Tulsi Gabbard is most searched candidate, Kirsten Gillibrand attacks Biden's record on women, and more...
The ruling comes after a long string of losses blocking other administration efforts to deny federal law enforcement funds to sanctuary jurisdictions. The different result in this case is largely a product of the unusual nature of the program involved.
Another day, another conflict between the Supreme Court’s Republican appointees in a criminal justice case.
Nationally, 66 percent of police departments report seeing declining numbers of applications.
Today's ruling in Gundy v. United States allows Congress to delegate to the executive broad power to create new criminal offenses. But there is hope the Court might reconsider Gundy in the future.
Attorney Mike Chase, behind the popular @CrimeADay Twitter feed, talks about his new book, How to Become a Federal Criminal.
Mike Chase, the man behind the popular @CrimeADay Twitter feed, on his new book, How to Become a Federal Criminal
May the House of Representatives Appeal Dismissal of Criminal Charges, When the Justice Department Doesn't Appeal?
From Prof. Jonathan Nash (Emory), an expert on Congressional standing.
You might consider buying a hat to cover your face—and hoping you’ll be allowed to wear it.
A recent dissenting opinion by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch highlights some of the dangers of the enormous scope of modern criminal law.
The symposium includes contributions by 16 legal commentators, including VC bloggers Keith Whittington and myself.
Justice Department Decides Not to Appeal Court Ruling Striking Down Federal Law Banning Female Genital Mutilation
The decision is likely to be unpopular. But it is the right thing to do nonetheless, as the law is unconstitutional. Not every evil must be addressed by a federal law.
Supreme Court Rules that Excessive Fines Clause Applies to States and Constrains Civil Asset Forfeiture
The decision in Timbs v. Indiana is a significant step forward for property rights and civil liberties, though a key issue remains to be resolved by lower courts.
An interesting 2018 California case I just came across.
Plus: Rand Paul has "never been prouder" of Trump, the Women's March clashes with the Park Service, and Vegas' first Stripper Parade & Expo is coming soon.
Constitutional theory meets criminal defense meets Civil War history.
FGM is a horrible crime. But banning it is one of many issues the Constitution leaves to the states, much like banning rape and murder. Yesterday's court decision striking down the law was correct.
A question that now hangs like a miasma over D.C. is "Which of my staffers would hang me out to dry in order to avoid going to federal prison?"
Immigrants who commit crimes should be punished. But no more than others who commit the same offense.
There is no justification for a proposed law that would make attacks on police officers a federal crime.
This isn't an enhancement for assaults on your spouse -- it's an enhancement for assaults on anyone, if you happen to be married.