Fraud Without Financial Injury

If a liar lies to induce someone into a deal and the other person suffers no monetary loss, is it still a fraud? Yes, under the federal “wire fraud” statute, the U.S. Supreme Court decided today in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909. The high court was unanimous as to that basic rule, but there were some disagreements on scope and the underlying issue in the fraudulent inducement.

The Pennsylvania Dept. of Transportation needed some restoration work done, and the federal government was picking up part of the tab. Federal regulations required a “disadvantaged-business program.” Kousisis represented that he would obtain painting supplies from a “disadvantaged” business, but that business was just a pass-through that got paid a fee for processing paperwork for supplies actually purchased elsewhere.

So PennDOT got the services it paid for, but it didn’t get the boost to supposedly disadvantaged business that was expressly made a material term of the contract. Is that fraud? Of course. Regardless of what one thinks of such clauses in government contracts, it was part of the deal. In order to get money, Kousisis made a fraudulent inducement on a term that was material to the other party, and that is all the law requires.

So where is the disagreement? Continue reading . . .

Justice Department Dismissing Biden Era Consent Decrees

“Today, we are ending the Biden Civil Rights Division’s failed experiment of handcuffing local leaders and police departments with factually unjustified consent decrees,” announced Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon. Since the beginning of the Obama administration and continuing over to the Biden administration, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has filed dozens of lawsuits against mostly big city police departments alleging unconstitutional policing practices and racial bias. Breanne Deppisch and David Spunt of Fox News report that that the DOJ is now dismissing lawsuits against the Minneapolis and Louisville police departments launched after the George Floyd riots of 2020. In both cases the government claimed that the departments were racially biased.

Continue reading . . .

Police Use of Force and the “Moment of Threat”

The Supreme Court has long held that claims of unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment must be evaluated under the “totality of the circumstances.” Since Illinois v. Gates in 1983, it has rejected categorical rules that confine the assessment. Today the high court decided in Barnes v. Felix that a claim of unlawful use of force against a police officer cannot be confined to the “moment of threat.” Unlawful use of force is considered a seizure and analyzed under the Fourth Amendment.

Today, we reject that approach as improperly narrowing the requisite Fourth Amendment analysis. To assess whether an officer acted reasonably in using force, a court must consider all the relevant circumstances, including facts and events leading up to the climactic moment.

No big surprise there. The decision was unanimous. Continue reading . . .

Enjoining State Prosecutions in Federal Court

After the Texas Attorney General gave Yelp, Inc. notice of intent to file a quasi-criminal enforcement suit against it, Yelp went yelping to the federal district court in San Francisco for an injunction against the enforcement.

Can they do that? No, said the district judge, and today a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit affirmed. This isn’t a new rule. It’s an old case called Younger.

Over 55 years ago, a federal district court enjoined a prosecution in California state court. The Los Angeles District Attorney (and future California Attorney General) Evelle Younger, took it all the way to the Supreme Court. In Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37 (1971), the high court established a general rule that federal courts should abstain from using their injunctive powers against prosecutions in state courts. Federal-law defenses must generally be asserted in the state court. There is an exception for bad faith prosecutions.

First Amendment defenses generally are not an exception. Younger itself was such a case. Yelp did not succeed in showing bad faith here. Continue reading . . .

Culture, Crime, and Statistics

Barry Latzer, Emeritus Professor of Criminology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, has this letter on culture and crime statistics in the Wall Street Journal.

If economic gains are associated with rising crime and economic downturns with declining crime, the prevailing theories of crime causation need rethinking. Indeed it seems the relationship between crime and economic conditions is unpredictable, and cultural values play a central role in the extent of violent behavior by various social groups.

Professor Latzer is too modest. The prevailing theories have already been rethought. By him. Continue reading . . .

Progressive Policies Driving Minneapolis Crime Wave

A spate of murders in Minneapolis last week has focused attention on the impact of the city’s progressive, lenient treatment of juvenile and habitual adult offenders. Audrey Conklin of Fox News reports that, beginning on April 29, there were six shootings over 24 hours which left six people dead and five others injured. The city has been the epicenter of anti-police policies since the 2020 George Floyd riots with violent crime and murder up dramatically since 2019, while crime has declined nationally. “Minneapolis, sadly, is experiencing the tragic consequences of years of anti-police rhetoric and failed leadership from the Minneapolis State Council and the lunatic county prosecutor of Hennepin County in which Minneapolis sits,” said Jim Schultz, 2022 candidate for state Attorney General and president of the Minnesota Private Business Council. “When city officials demonize law enforcement and slash police budgets and refuse to prosecute the criminals, the results are bought on the streets.”

Continue reading . . .

Illegal Who Killed Two Teens to Serve 1/3 of Sentence

Governor Gavin Newsom’s Department of Corrections has authorized a twice-deported Mexican national, sentenced to ten years in prison for killing two teens, to be released after serving 3.5 years. Art Pedroza of New Santa Ana reports that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) plans to release Oscar Eduardo Ortega-Anguiano in July.  The illegal alien repeat felon was convicted of the 2021 death of 19-year-old Anya Varfolomeev and 19-year-old Nicholay Osokin when he crashed his speeding car into them while driving drunk and without a license.  It was not Ortega-Anguiano’s first run-in with law enforcement.  Over the past several years the CDCR has increased the good-time and rehabilitation credits for violent criminals to the point where most only serve a fraction of their sentences. The CDCR is under the direct authority of the Governor who has publicly announced his goal of emptying out state prisons.

Continue reading . . .

Unbridled Progressive Hypocrisy in Philly

A social justice celebrity, honored for his advocacy for criminal justice reform (read no consequences for criminals) has been charged with murder days after Soros-bankrolled District Attorney Larry Krasner welcomed his endorsement for re-election. Ellie Rushing of the Philadelphia Inquirer reports that Sergio Hyland an organizer for Pennsylvania’s progressive Working Families Party, also funded by Soros, and another reform group, Straight Ahead, served over 20 years in prison for two previous murders.  Following his release from prison Hyland has advocated for alternatives to incarceration, the elimination of bail and reducing policing as the solutions to crime in Philadelphia.  Krasner, who has boasted about his record of reduced prosecutions, elimination of cash bail and shorter sentences for criminals, said that he was “honored” to accept the endorsement of Hyland and Working Families in early April.  Eight days later Hyland was arrested for the July 2024 execution-style murder of 30-year-old Jasimane Ransom, a mother of two.

Continue reading . . .

Dispatch Acquires SCOTUSBlog

SCOTUSblog has been acquired by Dispatch Media. Amy Howe has this post on SCOTUSblog, and Dispatch editor Steve Hayes has this post on the Dispatch.

I am pleased to see that Amy is staying with SCOTUSblog as a member of Dispatch’s team. Her posts on SCOTUSblog and her own blog have long been my go-to source for thorough and unbiased reports on Supreme Court cases that are outside my own field of expertise.

The usual squawkers are squawking that The Dispatch is “right-wing.” See, e.g., this post at Above the Law. But a quick look at The Dispatch’s home page illustrates how meaningless such simplistic designations are. They are certainly not Trump fans. One post is titled “Trump’s Team of Losers.” The Founding Manifesto states, “The goal was to create a place where thoughtful readers can come for conservative, fact-based news and commentary that doesn’t come either through the filter of the mainstream media or the increasingly boosterish media on the right.” That’s a long way from the image usually conjured up by the term “right wing.”

Continue reading . . .