MENU

Criminal Law & Procedure

Surveillance, National Security, and Privacy: The PCLOB Report on Section 702 Surveillance - Podcast

International & National Security Law Practice Group Podcast
Rachel Brand, James X. Dempsey, Matthew R.A. Heiman August 14, 2014

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) recently released its report on the surveillance program authorized under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The report includes an evaluation of whether the surveillance program comports with the terms of the statute, an evaluation of the Fourth Amendment issues raised by the program, and a discussion of the treatment of non-U.S. persons under the program. Also, the report makes policy recommendations for the program going forward. Two members of the PCLOB will discuss the report on this Teleforum and answer audience questions.

  • Hon. Rachel Brand, Chief Counsel for Regulatory Litigation, National Chamber Litigation Center, United States Chamber of Commerce; Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; former Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Legal Policy, United States Department of Justice
  • Hon. James X. Dempsey, Senior Counsel, Center for Democracy & Technology; Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
  • Moderator: Matthew R.A. Heiman, Vice President, Chief Compliance & Ethics Officer, Tyco

Privacy and National Security: The Merits of the Leahy FISA Reform Bill - Podcast

International & National Security Law Practice Group Podcast
Stewart A. Baker, Harley Geiger August 13, 2014

Following the Snowden leaks, the country is once again re-examining the proper balance between national security and individual privacy. Senator Patrick Leahy (Vermont) has introduced a bill that would revise aspects of certain NSA surveillance programs. Two leading experts addressed the merits of this bill.

  • Hon. Stewart A. Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • Harley Geiger, Senior Counsel and Deputy Director, Freedom, Security and Surveillance Project, Center for Democracy & Technology

Supreme Court Criminal Law Round Up - October Term 2013 - Podcast

Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
Dean Mazzone, Kent S. Scheidegger July 22, 2014

The Supreme Court issued a number of notable opinions in the area of criminal law during the recently concluded term. Members of the Federalist Society’s Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Executive Committee offered their analysis on recent developments in the Supreme Court’s criminal law jurisprudence and fielded questions from a call-in audience.

  • Dean Mazzone, Chief of the Enterprise and Major Crimes Division, Massachusetts Attorney General's Office
  • Kent S. Scheidegger, Legal Director and General Counsel, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation

Loughrin v. United States - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 7-15-14 featuring Todd Braunstein
Todd F. Braunstein July 15, 2014

On June 23, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Loughrin v. United States. The question in this case is whether the government must prove that a defendant intended to defraud a bank and expose it to risk of loss in every prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 1344, or whether the government need only prove that a defendant knowingly attempted to defraud someone “to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court, which held that the government does not need to prove that a defendant charged with violating 18 U. S. C.§1344(2) intended to defraud a bank. The judgment of the Tenth Circuit was affirmed. Justice Kagan's opinion was joined in full by the Chief and Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor. Justices Scalia and Thomas also joined as to Parts I and II, Part III–A except the last paragraph, and the last footnote of Part III–B. In addition, Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Thomas, concurred in part and in the judgment.  Justice Alito filed a separate concurrence in part and in the judgment.

To discuss the case, we have Todd Braunstein, who is counsel at the law firm WilmerHale.

Hall v. Florida - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 7-15-14 featuring Kent Scheidegger
Kent S. Scheidegger July 15, 2014

On May 27, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Hall v. Florida. The question in the case is whether the Florida scheme for identifying intellectually disabled defendants in capital cases violates Atkins v. Virginia. In an opinion delivered by Justice Kennedy, the Court held that the relevant Florida law, under which all further exploration of intellectual disability is foreclosed if a prisoner is deemed to have an IQ above 70,­ creates an unacceptable risk that persons with intellectual disability will be executed, and thus is unconstitutional.  Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan joined the opinion of the Court. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, which Chief Justice Roberts, as well as Justices Scalia and Thomas, joined. The decision of the Supreme Court of Florida was reversed and the case remanded.

To discuss the case, we have Mr. Kent Scheidegger, who is the Legal Director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.