Deferred Prosecution Agreements on Trial: Lessons from the Law of Unconstitutional Conditions

Deferred Prosecution Agreements on Trial: Lessons from the Law of Unconstitutional Conditions

Files

Description

This chapter examines the appropriate limit of deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) in light of the serious dangers in using any principle of corporate criminal liability. It begins with an overview of the so-called “grand inversion” and the role that the Holder, Thompson, and McNulty memos played in exploiting this grand inversion against corporations. It then considers how the unconstitutional conditions doctrine should inform the question of what types of terms should be included in DPAs. It also discusses vicarious criminal liability and the corporate criminal prosecution against the now defunct Arthur Andersen and Co. It argues that the existing standard for corporate crime is too broad and that prosecutors exercise too much power over companies. The chapter concludes with a discussion of terms requiring corporations to take certain positions in political debates over questions of social policy.

Source Publication

Prosecutors in the Boardroom: Using Criminal Law to Regulate Corporate Conduct

Source Editors/Authors

Anthony S. Barkow, Rachel E. Barkow

Publication Date

2011

Deferred Prosecution Agreements on Trial: Lessons from the Law of Unconstitutional Conditions

Share

COinS