The Crime Report
MAY 19, 2021
The order recognized that executive agencies have promulgated “thousands of regulations, creating a thicket of requirements that can be difficult to navigate,” and sought to make sure that all regulatory criminal laws are “clearly written so that all Americans can understand what is prohibited and act accordingly.”.
The Crime Report
FEBRUARY 21, 2023
In a recently published research paper in the Stanford Law Review, Aya Gruber, a law professor at the University of Colorado, considers the concept of “sex exceptionalism” in the United States criminal justice system and asks readers to take a second look at how we treat sex crimes. Gruber asked.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
JURIST
APRIL 15, 2024
Gijs de Bra is a JURIST Assistant Editor and SCOTUS special correspondent, and a 2L at Cornell Law School. What if we define wrongful as unlawful under state or local law? Justice Alito, no longer meditating, raised an important rule-of-law issue. But that opened the door to further questions. He asked Ms.
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 28, 2022
Even in the midst of a historic opioid crisis, and an intensely fractured Supreme Court term, the justices found common ground in longstanding presumptions of criminal law and the core principle of physician discretion. The case, Ruan v. The question was whether a doctor’s subjective intent in prescribing matters.
SCOTUSBlog
MARCH 2, 2022
Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested the regulation could be helpfully clarified — a suggestion the government’s lawyer, Deputy Solicitor General Eric Feigin, resisted, noting that the language in the regulation tracks language in the statute and that it would be difficult to improve on it.
JonathanTurley
JULY 21, 2022
Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe said the question was only what would be charged first, since Trump’s felonies were shown “without any doubt, beyond a reasonable doubt, beyond any doubt, and the crimes are obvious.” It is the type of evidence used to show mens rea — “guilty mind.” Trump is in trouble.
The IP Law Blog
MARCH 2, 2021
At the Supreme Court, Romag argued that requiring willfulness for a profits award “flouts the plain text of section 35(a) and undermines the broader policies of the Lanham Act,” and is a “serious misinterpretation of federal law” that should not be allowed to stand. The Court found the argument intriguing but problematic.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
40 
Let's personalize your content