Federal prosecutions of illegal gambling operations can include charges such as wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
Describes common types of federal charges used in cases involving illegal gambling schemes.
U.S. federal courts can manage large multi-defendant criminal indictments by dividing defendants into smaller groups for separate status conferences and pretrial scheduling.
November 24, 2025
high
procedural
Pretrial case-management technique used to handle complexity and convenience in large indictments.
Under federal law, a U.S. district court has authority to appoint a successor U.S. attorney when the Attorney General's interim appointment authority has expired.
November 24, 2025
high
procedural
Mechanism for filling U.S. attorney vacancies when the Attorney General's 120-day interim appointment period has ended.
An alternative legal interpretation, advanced by some defense counsel, is that the 120-day limit for interim U.S. attorney appointments begins with the Attorney General's initial appointment and therefore limits the total tenure of interim appointments to 120 days.
November 24, 2025
high
legal interpretation
Competing statutory interpretations about whether multiple interim appointments can extend the aggregate interim tenure beyond 120 days.
U.S. courts can set aside or vacate criminal indictments and other prosecutorial actions that stem from an unlawfully appointed prosecutor.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
Judicial authority to invalidate executive actions taken by officials whose appointments do not comply with governing appointment law.
A dismissal without prejudice permits the prosecuting authority to refile criminal charges in the future.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
Procedural effect of dismissals labeled 'without prejudice' in criminal litigation.
Statutes of limitations can bar criminal prosecutions if charges are not filed before the statutory deadline expires.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
Temporal limitation on the ability to initiate criminal charges set by law.
A criminal case dismissed with prejudice bars the prosecuting authority from bringing the same charges again.
November 24, 2025
high
legal_definition
Defines the legal effect of a dismissal with prejudice in criminal proceedings.
A criminal case dismissed without prejudice can be refiled, meaning the prosecuting authority may be able to bring the same charges again.
November 24, 2025
high
legal_definition
Defines the legal effect of a dismissal without prejudice in criminal proceedings.
In legal arguments about press access, the Oval Office and Air Force One are characterized as 'invitation-only' spaces distinct from the White House briefing room, and parties assert that invitation-only spaces are not subject to viewpoint-neutral access requirements under the First Amendment.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
This describes a legal distinction raised in litigation over journalist access to specific White House locations.
Whether the president may exclude specific reporters or news organizations from covering official events based on their viewpoints is a contested First Amendment question about viewpoint discrimination and access to government-controlled spaces.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
This summarizes the constitutional issue at the core of disputes over press access to presidential events.
The White House press pool is a longstanding system used to organize how news organizations cover the White House, and its composition and practices have changed and evolved over time.
November 24, 2025
high
operational
This describes the durable operational mechanism for coordinating White House coverage by the press.
Prosecutors alleged that illegal poker-rigging operations can employ altered card-shuffling machines, hidden cameras in chip trays, specially modified sunglasses, and X-ray equipment built into tables to read players' cards.
November 24, 2025
medium
temporal
Allegations described in a federal criminal case concerning organized illegal poker games.
Federal charges of money laundering conspiracy and wire fraud conspiracy each carry a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in prison under U.S. federal law.
November 24, 2025
high
legal
Maximum statutory penalties associated with those common federal criminal charges.
Government exclusion or restriction of press access as retaliation for a news organization's choice of language or terminology can raise First Amendment free-speech issues.
November 23, 2025
high
legal
General legal principle about retaliatory government actions against the press
A U.S. federal district court concluded that excluding a news organization from White House access because of its refusal to use a presidentially preferred term can violate the First Amendment.
November 23, 2025
high
legal
Court finding addressing government retaliation against press based on editorial language choices
U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit precedent holds that pretrial publicity, even when intense, is not by itself a constitutional defect that automatically requires dismissal of charges.
November 21, 2025
high
legal_principle
Established appellate precedent regarding the effect of media coverage on criminal prosecutions.
Careful questioning of prospective jurors during voir dire is a standard judicial procedure used to mitigate potential prejudice from pretrial publicity instead of dismissing an indictment or categorically barring a particular punishment.
November 21, 2025
high
procedural
Voir dire is a routine method courts use to assess juror impartiality and address publicity-related bias.
Federal courts in the United States have the authority to issue injunctions that halt National Guard or federal troop deployments within U.S. jurisdictions and can stay those injunctions temporarily to allow for appeals.
November 20, 2025
high
contextual
Describes the judicial authority and procedural options available to federal courts regarding challenges to military or Guard deployments.
Federal judges overseeing requests from immigration detainees generally conclude that noncitizens who are detained while present within the United States are entitled to due process rights.
November 20, 2025
high
legal
Describes a common judicial conclusion in federal court proceedings about the applicability of due process to noncitizens detained inside the U.S.
U.S. federal courts have generally recognized that noncitizens who are detained while residing within the United States are entitled to constitutional due process protections, whereas noncitizens stopped at or near the border are not entitled to the same due process protections.
November 20, 2025
high
legal
Judicial interpretation of due process rights in the context of immigration detention and border stops.
A dismissal 'without prejudice' in a criminal case allows the prosecution to refile the charges.
September 22, 2025
high
legal
General criminal procedure principle regarding dismissals without prejudice.
A court can declare indictments invalid if the person who presented the charges to a grand jury was not lawfully appointed to serve as a U.S. Attorney.
September 22, 2025
high
legal
Legal principle about the authority required to present charges to a grand jury.
A court may conclude that retrospective ratification by the Attorney General does not necessarily cure defects arising from an unlawful appointment of an interim U.S. Attorney.
September 22, 2025
high
legal
Judicial reasoning limiting the effect of after-the-fact validation of an official's authority.
A 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision (Rucho v. Common Cause) held that federal courts cannot adjudicate claims of partisan gerrymandering.
June 27, 2019
high
legal
Supreme Court ruling limiting federal-court review of partisan gerrymandering claims.
Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) is a U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the federal government may not indefinitely detain noncitizens after a removal order when removal is not reasonably foreseeable, and that federal courts may order release in such circumstances.
June 28, 2001
high
temporal
Supreme Court precedent governing detention of noncitizens subject to removal orders.
Jerry E. Smith is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
high
static
Judicial appointment background
Jeffrey Brown is a U.S. District Court judge who was appointed by President Donald J. Trump.
high
static
Judicial appointment background
David Guaderrama is a U.S. District Court judge who was appointed by President Barack Obama.
high
static
Judicial appointment background
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia functions both as the federal prosecutor and, effectively, as the local district attorney for nearly all serious adult crimes in the District of Columbia.
high
legal
Describes the dual prosecutorial role of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C.
In the District of Columbia, federal grand juries are typically reserved for the consideration of more serious crimes.
high
legal
Describes customary use of federal grand juries in Washington, D.C.
The District of Columbia legal system includes local (city) grand juries that can be used to secure indictments in local prosecutions.
high
legal
Notes the existence of city grand juries within D.C.'s legal framework used for local indictments.
Civil immigration fines may be enforced through collection measures such as wage garnishment and seizure of vehicles or real property to recover assessed amounts.
high
policy
Types of collection mechanisms used to enforce civil penalties in immigration contexts.
Status hearings in U.S. federal district courts allow defendants and their attorneys to update the court on scheduling, progress, and deadlines for discovery, motion filings, and settlement talks.
high
procedural
Describes the typical purpose and scope of status hearings in federal criminal cases.
Federal courts may deny pretrial release (bail) to defendants whom prosecutors allege have strong ties to organized crime.
high
procedural
Reflects a common judicial consideration when assessing bail in cases involving alleged organized-crime connections.
The U.S. Constitution and federal law allocate appointment authority for U.S. attorneys by giving the President the power to nominate U.S. attorneys and giving the Senate the role of advising on and confirming those nominations.
high
legal
Describes the constitutional and statutory allocation of appointment and confirmation roles for U.S. attorneys.
Federal law permits temporary appointments of U.S. attorneys that expire after 120 days, after which additional statutory procedures apply to fill the vacancy.
high
legal
Describes the duration and limited nature of certain interim U.S. attorney appointments under federal law.