Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: The Supreme Court Considers Whether an Independent Agency with a Single Director Who Can Be Removed Only “For Cause” is Constitutional

RODGER CITRON

Rodger Citron, Associate Dean for Research & Scholarship and Professor of Law at Touro Law, comments on a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court will hear argument this week that presents the question whether an independent agency with a single director who can be removed only “for cause” violates the separation of powers principle enshrined in the Constitution. Citron notes that the decision to hear the case is unusual in that there is no conflict among the federal appeals courts, but he points out that that the government’s support of the cert. petition and then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent on the issue when it came before the D.C. Circuit likely helped the present case come before the Court.

Read More

United States v. Sanders

Docket: 17-20492

Opinion Date: March 2, 2020

Judge: Jerry E. Smith

Areas of Law: Criminal Law, White Collar Crime

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendants' convictions for conspiracy and fraud for participating in a plot to defraud the federal workers’ compensation fund. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Defendants Rose and Sanders of conspiracy to commit health care and wire fraud, as well as health care fraud and aiding and abetting. Furthermore, the evidence was sufficient to convict Rose of conspiracy to launder money, and of money laundering and aiding and abetting. The court also held that the district court did not plainly err by denying a motion for a mistrial, and there was no error in the district court's handling of a recalcitrant witness. Finally, the court upheld the criminal forfeiture order.

United States v. Alvarado-Palacio

Docket: 17-51030

Opinion Date: March 2, 2020

Judge: James Earl Graves, Jr.

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress his statements and confession. Defendant was convicted of possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. The court held that, under the totality of the circumstances, the district court did not clearly err by determining that defendant knowingly waived his Miranda rights. In this case, defendant initially affirmed that he understood his right to an attorney prior to or during interrogation, there was a video of him signing the Spanish translated waiver, he had a second affirmation stating that he understood his rights, and he had an agreement to speak with the agents.

United States v. Moton

Docket: 18-40884

Opinion Date: March 2, 2020

Judge: Higginbotham

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for two counts of possession with intent to distribute a synthetic cannabinoid. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's finding that defendant acted with the requisite mens rea; sentencing errors in the presentencing report did not affect defendant's sentence and were harmless; and the district court did not err by applying a sentencing enhancement under USSG 2D1.1(b)(12) for maintaining a premises for manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance.