Insights < BACK TO ALL INSIGHTS
How Thick is the Blanket? – Preemptive Pardons as a Presidential Power
FEATURED
December 6, 2024
How Thick is the Blanket? – Preemptive Pardons as a Presidential Power
By: James Trusty
As the presiding judge scolded Hunter Biden’s attorneys this week, “The Constitution provides the President with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 1, but nowhere does the Constitution give the President the authority to rewrite history.”[1] But what exactly is that history he claims is being re-written? Judge Scarsi was challenging the largely academic issue of whether a pardon signed at noon, for instance, protects against crimes committed on the same day at dinnertime. That is a very limited run at the notion of “preemptive” pardons, and it seems to be strictly a question of chronology. The judge did not seem to question the idea of…
Supremely Improbable
July 30, 2024
Supremely Improbable
By: James Trusty
President Biden’s pronounced objectives for Supreme Court “reform” are improbable, politically lifeless under a particularly lame duck presidency, and motivated by transparently November-driven calculations. But even if the proposed changes are doomed from the start, they push public discourse on a couple of issues that are red meat for the democrats. The stated reforms are superficially simple ones: 1) to “clarify” that “there is no…
Presidential Immunity Ruling Stirs Sound and Fury
July 5, 2024
Presidential Immunity Ruling Stirs Sound and Fury
By: James Trusty
The immediate and eventual impact of the Supreme Court’s immunity decision in Trump v. United States is both considerable and dramatically misrepresented. The initial consequences include likely delay to the January 6 prosecution out of D.C. and the setting of hearings—in D.C., Georgia and south Florida—where the judges will be required to make factual findings as to whether the evidence supporting the indictments reflect “official…
Videoconferencing to the Rescue
April 1, 2020
Videoconferencing to the Rescue
By: James Trusty
While the recent passage of the “Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act is receiving tremendous attention because of its price tag, strategies to keep businesses and families afloat, and its hidden gems for beneficiaries like the Kennedy Center, it also has a component that is important for federal practitioners who handle criminal matters in District Courts around the country. Federal courts currently show…
How White Hats Get Dirty
March 19, 2020
How White Hats Get Dirty
By: James Trusty
Historically, undercover operations by law enforcement would run into problematic “loyalty tests,” designed to make sure that the criminal conspirators could trust the “new guy.” Biker gangs would ask this “pledge” to beat someone up or take drugs, knowing law enforcement agencies would likely not let that happen, even in an undercover capacity. Prostitution stings could be compromised by either a John smart enough to…
A Tiny Crack in the Wall?
December 10, 2019
A Tiny Crack in the Wall?
By: James Trusty
Federal sentencing proceedings have a long and rich history of including every speck of good and bad that a defendant brings to the table. Unlike the trial itself, there are no Rules of Evidence that apply to keep the factfinder from considering unreliable or unproven information. The judge need only find facts by a preponderance of evidence, and those facts can be established by hearsay….
Celebrating 10 Years by Strategizing with the Best
August 6, 2019
Celebrating 10 Years by Strategizing with the Best
By: Nicole Kardell
How do you celebrate ten years of defending people against a criminal justice system that plays with a stacked deck? Bring in a renowned journalist and legal commentator to talk problems and solutions. Emily Bazelon, a staff writer at New York Times Magazine and the Truman Capote Fellow for Creative Writing and Law at Yale Law School, kicked off Ifrah Law’s Ten-Year Anniversary with an…
When a Guilty Plea is a Bad Gamble: SCOTUS Weighs in on Double Jeopardy and the Dual Sovereignty Rule
June 19, 2019
When a Guilty Plea is a Bad Gamble: SCOTUS Weighs in on Double Jeopardy and the Dual Sovereignty Rule
By: James Trusty
On Monday, the Supreme Court handed down Gamble v. United States, No. 17-646, an interesting decision on Double Jeopardy with practical and predictive ramifications beyond its limited facts. Terance Martez Gamble was caught possessing a loaded handgun in Mobile, Alabama, after previously having been convicted for robbery. He pleaded guilty and received one year in jail. Federal prosecutors then indicted him for felon-in-possession, based upon…
