DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Erosion of Business Civil Liberties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Erosion of Business Civil Liberties “What is astonishing is that the attorney-client privilege, one of the foundational rights on which rests Anglo-American legal culture . should now be under siege. The two federal agencies that have been most SPECIAL REPORT: vigorous in seeking waiver of the attorney-client privilege have been the Department of Federal Erosion Justice and — unfortunately, I of Business must say — the Securities and Exchange Commission.” Civil Liberties Paul S. Atkins SEC Commissioner January 18, 2008 WLF Washington Legal Foundation “The message should be clear Advocate for freedom and justice© 2009 Massachusetts Avenue, NW that prosecutions will go as high Washington, DC 20036 up the corporate hierarchy as www.wlf.org the evidence permits and we will hold senior managers of corporations accountable, as well as the corporation itself.” Granta Y. Nakayama EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance June 12, 2006 SPECIAL REPORT: Federal Erosion of Business Civil Liberties This Report, along with WLF’s Timeline: Federal Erosion of Business Civil Liberties, is a part of our ongoing CRIMINALIZATION OF FREE ENTERPRISE—BUSINESS CIVIL LIBERTIES PROGRAM. For more information on this program or to receive additional copies of this Report or the Timeline, please contact WLF at (202) 588-0302 or visit us online at www.wlf.org. Copyright © 2008 Washington Legal Foundation Table of Contents Introduction: The Honorable Dick Thornburgh .........................ii Chapter One: Mens Rea, Public Welfare Offenses, and the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine ............................ 1-1 Chapter Two: Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Enforcement Policies ............................................. 2-1 Chapter Three: Department of Justice Criminal Prosecution Policies ....... 3-1 Chapter Four: Parallel Civil and Criminal Prosecutions ................. 4-1 Chapter Five: Attorney-Client and Work Product Privileges ............ 5-1 Chapter Six: Deferred Prosecution and Non-Prosecution Agreements .... 6-1 Chapter Seven: U.S. Sentencing Guidelines ............................ 7-1 Appendix: Reference Resources: Washington Legal Foundation Legal Studies Publications and Programs ................A-1 i INTRODUCTION by The Honorable Dick Thornburgh The Washington Legal Foundation's SPECIAL REPORT: FEDERAL EROSION OF BUSINESS CIVIL LIBERTIES provides the legal community with an excellent summary, analysis, and critique of the key legal, judicial, and regulatory developments in the growing trend to criminalize normal business activities. Ideal for reference by corporate counsel, white-collar defense attorneys, and the general legal and public policy community, WLF's up-to-date REPORT traces the controversial development of the following legal topics in seven chapters, each followed by a timeline, with an emphasis on environmental criminal enforcement by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice (DOJ): 1) Mens Rea, Public Welfare Offenses, and the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine; 2) EPA Criminal Enforcement Policies; 3) DOJ Criminal Prosecution Policies; 4) Parallel Civil and Criminal Prosecutions; 5) Attorney-Client and Work Product Privileges; 6) Deferred Prosecution and Non-Prosecution Agreements; and 7) U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. An important theme of the REPORT is that the EPA and DOJ have often resorted to criminal prosecution of minor regulatory offenses when administrative and civil remedies would be more appropriate. In that regard, the REPORT presents several case studies that call into question the case selection criteria used by EPA and DOJ, and which reminds the reader of former Attorney General Robert Jackson's admonition to all U.S. Attorneys that "the prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America." Of particular interest is Chapter Five on the Attorney-Client Privilege, which discusses the assault by DOJ, the SEC, and other agencies on the venerable privilege, but also notes the successes that are being made to counter its erosion. I heartily commend the Washington Legal Foundation for producing this useful REPORT, which should be required reading for private and government lawyers alike, as well as for publishing a companion TIMELINE fold-out chart that chronicles and highlights the key events and cases described herein. The Honorable Dick Thornburgh has served as Governor of Pennsylvania, Attorney General of the United States, and Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations during a public career that has spanned over 30 years. Mr. Thornburgh is currently counsel to the national law firm of Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP in its Washington, D.C. office, and is Chairman of Washington Legal Foundation's Legal Policy Advisory Board. ii Chapter One Mens Rea, Public Welfare Offenses, and the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine Chapter One MENS REA, PUBLIC WELFARE OFFENSES, AND THE RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICER DOCTRINE “You cannot punish corporations. If you dissolve the offending corporation. .[y]ou merely drive what you are seeking to check into other forms or temporarily disorganize some important business altogether, to the infinite loss of thousands of entirely innocent persons, and to the great inconvenience of society as a whole." Woodrow Wilson Address to the Annual ABA Meeting (1910) ens Rea. Historically, Anglo- that were otherwise not considered criminal — MAmerican jurisprudence has required and indeed, were socially useful because they the government to prove that a defendant produced needed goods and services — were charged with a crime has performed a wrongful made subject to a vast array of complex laws act ("actus rea") with a wrongful intent ("mens and regulations. By 1900, there were only rea"), that is, "an evil-doing hand" and "an evil- approximately 165 federal criminal laws on the meaning mind." See Morissette v. United books. By 1970, the number increased more States, 342 U.S. 246, 251 (1952). The Supreme than ten-fold to approximately 2,000. In 1998, Court has described this principle as being "as an American Bar Association task force chaired universal and persistent in mature systems of by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, law as belief in freedom of the human will." Id. issued a report, The Federalization of Criminal at 250. Generally speaking, prosecutors are Law, which estimated the number of federal required to prove that a defendant had the criminal statutes to be 3,300. By 2004, there specific intent or purpose to commit a crime were more than 4,000 separate criminal that is inherently evil or wrongful, or malum in offenses scattered throughout 27,000 pages of se, such as robbery or assault. Society has the U.S. Code. JOHN S. BAKER, JR., THE traditionally dealt with these common law or FEDERALIST SOC'Y FOR L. & PUB. POL., mala in se crimes by criminal prosecution and MEASURING EXPLOSIVE GROWTH OF FED. appropriate punishment, including CRIME LEGISLATION (2004). As one incarceration, to serve the purposes of commentator aptly described it, the "federal retribution and deterrence. criminal code" is "simply an 'incomprehensible,' random and incoherent, However, with the dramatic growth of the 'duplicative, incomplete, and organizationally administrative and regulatory state in the last nonsensical' mass of federal legislation that several decades, many commercial activities carries criminal penalties." Julie R. O'Sullivan, 1-1 The Federal Criminal "Code" is a Disgrace: White, 766 F. Supp. 873, 882 (E.D. Wash. Obstruction Statutes as Case Study 1991). See also Inland Steel Co. v. EPA, 901 (SYMPOSIUM 2006: THE CHANGING FACE OF F.2d 1419, 1421 (7th Cir. 1990) (describing WHITE-COLLAR CRIME), 96 J. CRIM. L. & RCRA as a "statutory Cloud Cuckoo Land"). CRIMINOLOGY 643 (2006) (citations omitted). Environmental regulations are so vast and complex that most corporate officials candidly In addition to the plethora of federal admit that it is simply impossible to comply criminal laws, the number of regulations in the with all of them. For example, if certain Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), many of solvents are poured onto a surface to be them criminally enforceable, far exceeds the cleaned, the rag used to wipe the surface statutes, with estimates ranging up to 300,000. becomes a hazardous waste, which is then See John C. Coffee, Jr., Does Unlawful Mean subject to strict storage and disposal rules. Criminal?: Reflections on the Disappearing However, if the solvent is first poured onto the Tort/Crime Distinction in American Law, 71 rag, then the rag is not a hazardous waste. B.U.L. REV. 193, 216 (1991). Regulations Businesses and individuals are faced with a issued by the Environmental Protection Agency "regulatory hydra" and regulatory terms (EPA) alone fill 30 volumes of the CFR, which suggestive of "Alice In Wonderland," as one is 50 percent more than the dense Internal court put it. United States v. Mills, 817 F. Revenue Service (IRS) regulations. Indeed, the Supp. 1546, 1548 (N.D. Fla. 1993). regulations just for three of the more than dozen environmental statutes — the Clean Air For the most part, sanctions available for Act (CAA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and the violating these so-called mala prohibita Resource Conservation and Recovery Act offenses — conduct that is deemed wrongful (RCRA) — number 9,000 pages. Violations of only because a law or regulation prohibits or any one of these may lead to criminal regulates it — range from administrative prosecution. Some members of Congress penalties
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2008 Annual Report
    5 YEARS OF EXCELLENCE FEATURED ARTICLES AND THE 2008 ANNUAL REPORT Benjamin Franklin’s Shoe PAGE 4 A Road Rich with Milestones PAGE 10 Today and Tomorrow: 2008 Annual Report PAGE 16 2008 Financials PAGE 22 FEATUREMAILBOX ONE 2 NATIONAL CONSTITUTION CENTER 5 Years of Excellence LETTER FROM THE EDITORS Dear Friends: Exceptional. That is the only word that can fully describe the remarkable strides the National Constitution Center has made in the past five years. Since opening its doors on July 4, 2003, it has developed into one of the most esteemed institutions for the ongoing study, discussion and celebration of the United States’ most cherished document. We’re pleased to present a celebration of the Center’s first five years and the 2008 Annual Report. In the following pages you will read about the Center’s earliest days and the milestones it has experienced. You will learn about the moving exhibitions it has developed and presented over the years. You will look back at the many robust public conversations led by national figures that have occurred on site, and you will be introduced to a new and innovative international initiative destined to carry the Center boldly into the future. It has been a true pleasure to work for this venerable institution, informing and inspiring We the People. We both look forward to witnessing the Center’s future achievements and we are honored that the next chapter of this story will be written by the Center’s new Chairman, President Bill Clinton. Sincerely, President George H. W. Bush Joseph M.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, Vol. 155, Pt
    March 12, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, Vol. 155, Pt. 6 7157 raise about $300 billion a year. They Sunday, digging deep and putting were confirmed without a single dis- are not refunding that. So this is an- money in, a far greater percentage of senting vote by Democrats. Notwith- other giant problem the President has their pocket—and they are not getting standing that, Senate Republicans with his budget. any tax break for that. They are not have decided to ignore the national se- A couple other concluding points. We getting a tax break. They take a stand- curity challenges this country is facing have a situation here where we should ard deduction and they give to charity since the attacks of 9/11, and they have sit down together and think about our because it helps the people in this returned to their partisan, narrow, ide- children, our grandchildren. Instead of country who are in need. These are ological, and divisive tactics of the giving us what we want today, let us people who barely have enough money 1990s. think about the debt we are passing on to pay for food for their own families, In fact, it was the nomination of Eric to them. What is that debt like? It is as yet they give to charity. Holder to be the Deputy Attorney Gen- though we have taken their credit card Let us stop setting up a straw man eral in 1997 that was the last time a and we are running up their credit card that somehow the very wealthy among President’s choice for Deputy Attorney and they have to pay the finance us won’t give anything to charity if we General was held up in the Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
    UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY NOMINEE FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES GENERAL (PUBLIC) 1. Name: Full name (include any former names used). Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. 2. Position: State the position for which you have been nominated. Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States 3. Address: List current office address. If state of residence differs from your place of employment, please list the state where you currently reside. Frank R. Lautenberg United States Courthouse & Post Office Building 50 Walnut Street Newark, NJ 07101 4. Birthplace: State date and place of birth. April 1, 1950. Trenton, New Jersey 5. Marital Status: List spouse’s name, occupation, employer’s name and business address(es). Please also indicate the number of dependent children. Martha-Ann (Bomgardner) Alito. Librarian, substitute teacher, Caldwell-West Caldwell Board of Education, Harrison Building, 104 Gray Street, West Caldwell, NJ 07006. Two dependent children. 6. Education: List in reverse chronological order any college, law school, and other institutions of higher education attended. Please include dates of attendance, whether a degree was received, and the date each degree was received. 1972-1975: Yale Law School, J.D. June 1975 1968-1972: Princeton University, A.B. June 1972 7. Employment Record: List in reverse chronological order, all governmental agencies, business or professional corporations, companies, firms, or other enterprises, partnerships, institutions and organizations, non-profit or otherwise, with which you have been affiliated as an officer, director, partner, proprietor, elected official or employee since graduation from college, and if you received payment for your services.
    [Show full text]
  • Soft on Corporate Crime
    September 26, 2019 www.citizen.org Soft on Corporate Crime DOJ Refuses to Prosecute Corporate Lawbreakers, Fails to Deter Repeat Offenders Acknowledgments Rick Claypool, research director for Public Citizen’s President’s Office, is the author of this report. Alan Zibel, research director for Public Citizen’s Corporate Presidency Project, and Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, edited the report. Professor Brandon Garrett and Jonathan Ashley provided valuable insight and feedback on the report and assistance with the Duke University/University of Virginia Corporate Prosecution Registry, a comprehensive database of corporate criminal enforcement data they maintain. Former Public Citizen researcher Elizabeth Ben-Ishai authored an early version of the report. About Public Citizen Public Citizen is a national nonprofit organization with more than 500,000 members and supporters. We represent consumer interests through lobbying, litigation, administrative advocacy, research and public education on a broad range of issues including consumer rights in the marketplace, product safety, financial regulation, worker safety, safe and affordable health care, campaign finance reform and government ethics, fair trade, climate change, and corporate and government accountability. Public Citizen 1600 20th St. NW Washington, D.C. 20009 P: 202-588-1000 http://www.citizen.org © 2019 Public Citizen. Public Citizen Soft on Corporate Crime Contents Introduction: Corporate Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements Explained .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • History of the U.S. Attorneys
    Bicentennial Celebration of the United States Attorneys 1789 - 1989 "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor– indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." QUOTED FROM STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, BERGER V. UNITED STATES, 295 U. S. 88 (1935) Note: The information in this document was compiled from historical records maintained by the Offices of the United States Attorneys and by the Department of Justice. Every effort has been made to prepare accurate information. In some instances, this document mentions officials without the “United States Attorney” title, who nevertheless served under federal appointment to enforce the laws of the United States in federal territories prior to statehood and the creation of a federal judicial district. INTRODUCTION In this, the Bicentennial Year of the United States Constitution, the people of America find cause to celebrate the principles formulated at the inception of the nation Alexis de Tocqueville called, “The Great Experiment.” The experiment has worked, and the survival of the Constitution is proof of that.
    [Show full text]
  • Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program
    10 July 2009 Preface (U) Title III of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments Act of 2008 required the Inspectors General (IGs) of the elements of the Intelligence Community that participated in the President's Surveillance Program (PSP) to conduct a comprehensive review of the program. The IGs of the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence participated in the review required under the Act. The Act required the IGs to submit a comprehensive report on the review to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House Committee on the Judiciary. (U) In response to Title III requirements, we have prepared this unclassified report on the PSP, which summarizes the collective results of our reviews. Because many aspects of the PSP remain classified, and in order to provide the Congressional committees the complete results of our reviews, we also prepared, and have bound separately, a classified report on the PSP. The individual reports detailing the results of each IG's review are annexes to the classified report . L Co,J)_~. £b./I2W Glenn A. Fine Gordon S. Heddell o Inspector General Acting Inspector General Department of Justice Department of Defense r 9rlnl Wtt&J1;:J f20j0JLc( Patricia A. LeWiS Ge ~ Acting Inspector General Inspector General Central Intelligence Agency National Security Agency ROkh:.~ ~ Inspector General Office of the Director of National Intelligence UNCLASSIFIED REPORT ON THE PRESIDENT'S SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM I.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Control of Federal Prosecutions: Looking Back and Looking Forward
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2009 Political Control of Federal Prosecutions: Looking Back and Looking Forward Daniel C. Richman Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Daniel C. Richman, Political Control of Federal Prosecutions: Looking Back and Looking Forward, 58 DUKE L. J. 2087 (2009). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2464 This Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. POLITICAL CONTROL OF FEDERAL PROSECUTIONS: LOOKING BACK AND LOOKING FORWARD DANIEL RICHMANt ABSTRACT This Essay explores the mechanisms of control over federal criminal enforcement that the administration and Congress used or failed to use during George W. Bush's presidency. It gives particular attention to Congress, not because legislators played a dominant role, but because they generally chose to play such a subordinate role. My fear is that the media focus on management inadequacies or abuses within the Justice Department during the Bush administrationmight lead policymakers and observers to overlook the
    [Show full text]
  • University of Florida Thesis Or Dissertation Formatting
    APPLYING A THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE PERSPECTIVE TO THE DOJ’S USE OF DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENTS FOR CORPORATE OFFENDERS By LYNN LANGTON AUSTELL A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2012 1 © 2012 Lynn Langton Austell 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is dedicated to my parents and sister, John, Andrea, and Victoria Langton. Without their constant love, support, and encouragement I would never be where I am today. I am eternally grateful for the doors they opened and the opportunities they provided me. It is dedicated to my husband, Dan Austell, who has been endlessly loving, understanding, supportive, and patient through this process. I am incredibly thankful to him for keeping me sane, always lending a listening ear for venting, providing much needed distractions, and giving me a bright spot in every day. Finally, it is dedicated to my dissertation committee, Drs. Richard Hollinger, Marian Borg, Lonn Lanza-Kaduce, and Albert Matheny, who have gone above and beyond in providing wisdom, guidance and advice over the many years of this process. I am so thankful to them for their support and for not giving up on the idea or expectation that I would eventually finish someday. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Important Figures in the NSC
    Important Figures in the NSC Nixon Administration (1969-1973) National Security Council: President: Richard Nixon Vice President: Spiro Agnew Secretary of State: William Rogers Secretary of Defense: Melvin Laird Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA): Henry Kissinger Director of CIA: Richard Helms Chairman of Joint Chiefs: General Earle Wheeler / Admiral Thomas H. Moorer Director of USIA: Frank Shakespeare Director of Office of Emergency Preparedness: Brig. Gen. George Lincoln National Security Council Review Group (established with NSDM 2) APNSA: Henry A. Kissinger Rep. of Secretary of State: John N. Irwin, II Rep. of Secretary of Defense: David Packard, Bill Clements Rep. of Chairman of Joint Chiefs: Adm. Thomas H. Moorer Rep. of Director of CIA: Richard Helms, James R. Schlesinger, William E. Colby National Security Council Senior Review Group (NSDM 85—replaces NSCRG/ NSDM 2) APNSA: Henry A. Kissinger Under Secretary of State: Elliott L. Richardson / John N. Irwin, II Deputy Secretary of Defense: David Packard / Bill Clements Director of Central Intelligence: Richard Helms Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: General Earle Wheeler / Admiral Thomas H. Moorer Under Secretary’s Committee: Under Secretary of State: Elliott L. Richardson / John N. Irwin, II APNSA: Henry Kissinger Deputy Secretary of Defense: David Packard / Bill Clements Chairman of Joint Chiefs: Gen. Earle G. Wheeler / Adm. Thomas H. Moorer Director of CIA: Richard M. Helms Nixon/Ford Administration (1973-1977) National Security Council: President: Richard Nixon (1973-1974) Gerald Ford (1974-1977) Vice President: Gerald Ford (1973-1974) Secretary of State: Henry Kissinger Secretary of Defense: James Schlesinger / Donald Rumsfeld APNSA: Henry Kissinger / Brent Scowcroft Director of CIA: Richard Helms / James R.
    [Show full text]
  • PRIV FOIA Log July
    FOIA Request Log 7/1/2011 through 7/29/2011 Case No. Subject Category On July 5, 2011, John Viola, an individual in Arlington, Virginia, requested from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) copies of the following records: 1) strategic plans (department goals, objectives, opportunities, challenges, problems, action plans); 2) five-year plans (similar to #1 but over a 5-year period). These might be several years old; 3) risk management plans (similar to #1 and #2 but focusing on risks and risk management, perhaps for specific areas of concern); 4) annual reports PRIV 11-1006 (recent, such as FY201 0, 2011, or FY2012) or major policy reviews or addresses by department leadership (such as to FOIA Congress); 5) organizational charts (for major agencies or agency offices); 6) brochures or background summaries on major department programs; and 7) major studies or reports (such as task force studies), policy papers, or white papers that department management has commissioned for program guidance or evaluation. On July 5, 2011, (b)(6), an individual in Harlingen, Texas, requested from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) copies of the following records pertaining to DHS Trip request # (b)(6): 1) current processing status; 2) reasons why multiple stops and searches were conducted by TSA with no reasonable explanation; 3) a copy of the investigation report and results of investigation that TSA indicated that they started on me 6 months ago; 4) any information in regard to me that TSA, DHS, and any other DHS component has that can be legally
    [Show full text]
  • Bicentennial Celebration of the U.S. Attorneys
    Bicentennial Celebration of the United States Attorneys 1789 - 1989 "The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor– indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one." QUOTED FROM STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND, BERGER V. UNITED STATES, 295 U. S. 88 (1935) INTRODUCTION In this, the Bicentennial Year of the United States Constitution, the people of America find cause to celebrate the principles formulated at the inception of the nation Alexis de Tocqueville called, “The Great Experiment.” The experiment has worked, and the survival of the Constitution is proof of that. But with the celebration of the Constitution must also come the commemoration of those sharing responsibility for the realization of those noble principles in the lives of the American people, those commissioned throughout our nation’s history as United States Attorneys.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mcnulty Memorandum, the KPMG Decision and Corporate Cooperation: Individual Rights and Legal Ethics
    The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law CUA Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions Faculty Scholarship 2008 The McNulty Memorandum, the KPMG Decision and Corporate Cooperation: Individual Rights and Legal Ethics Sarah Helene Duggin The Catholic University of American, Columbus School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/scholar Part of the Business Organizations Law Commons Recommended Citation Sarah Helene Duggin, The McNulty Memorandum, the KPMG Decision and Corporate Cooperation: Individual Rights and Legal Ethics, 21 GEO. J. LEGAL ETHICS 341 (2008). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Articles and Other Contributions by an authorized administrator of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 2007 SYMPOSIUM The McNulty Memorandum, the KPMG Decision and Corporate Cooperation: Individual Rights and Legal Ethics SARAH HELENE DUGGIN* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE CURRENT STATUS OF FEDERAL CORPORATE COOPERATION POLICIES AND ONGOING EFFORTS TO EFFECT ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND DOCTRINAL CHANGE .................... 349 A. THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL CORPORATE COOPERATION POLICIES ............................. 349 B. THE McNULTY MEMORANDUM ..................... 356 1. PRINCIPAL PROVISIONS ............................ 357 a. W aiver Requests .............................. 357 b.
    [Show full text]