The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport may create a new strategic consideration for recipients of state attorney general civil investigative demands (CIDs). In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that a nonprofit could pursue a Section 1983 challenge to a New Jersey Attorney General subpoena in federal court based on alleged First Amendment associational harms arising from compelled donor disclosure.
Although the Court emphasized the narrow nature of its holding, the decision potentially opens the door to federal court challenges where state attorney general CIDs implicate donor anonymity, expressive association, advocacy activities, or other constitutional interests. The ruling also reflects the Court’s continued willingness to recognize Article III standing based on alleged chilling effects tied to First Amendment rights.
Our latest post examines the decision, the arguments raised by a coalition of state attorneys general, and what the ruling may mean for companies, nonprofits, trade associations, and other recipients of state attorney general investigative demands
http://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Kenneth G. Coffinhttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngKenneth G. Coffin2026-05-20 11:24:572026-05-20 13:15:18Supreme Court’s First Choice Decision May Expand Federal Court Options to Recipients of State Attorney General CIDs
The SEC yesterday rescinded its so-called gag rule policy prohibiting parties from denying the allegations in no admit/no deny settlements. The SEC also announced it would not enforce gag rule provisions in existing settlements (which it pointed out was not enforced previously). Even with this policy change, the SEC can still agree to no admit/no deny settlements, and it noted that it may continue to require admissions in some cases.
The practical effects of this policy change remain uncertain, but we can predict at least two possible consequences despite the fact that this will be a welcome change for some settling parties. First, the SEC staff may seek to include more detailed allegations in settled orders to make it more difficult for settling parties to deny the allegations. Second, some settling parties have viewed the gag rule as helpful because it constrained their public statements after a settlement. Without the ability to rely on the “no deny” language, those parties may now face pressure to say more, which could introduce new risks.
On May 12, 2026, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced a $549.5 million settlement with Perfectus Aluminum Acquisitions LLC and four affiliated companies to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act (“FCA”) by evading customs duties. This settlement is the largest trade-related settlement under the FCA.
The action was initiated by qui tam cases brought by individuals who worked for U.S.-based competitors and the Aluminum Extrusion Counsel and ultimately coordinated through the DOJ’s Trade Fraud Task Force, which involved cooperation between DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security. This case highlights the increasing use of the FCA to hold importers liable for the underpayment of customs duties, the Administration’s commitment to enforcing U.S. customs laws, and the potential for competitors and former employees to harness the FCA to motivate federal investigations into allegations of trade fraud.
This post examines the settlement and discusses its implications for importers, manufacturers, and other companies facing customs and trade enforcement risk.
https://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/04/MN-18360_Updated-Enhanced-Scrutiny-Blog-imagery_833x606_29.jpg606833Kristin Graham Koehlerhttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngKristin Graham Koehler2026-05-18 11:46:492026-05-18 11:53:33Tariff Enforcement at the Forefront: Importer Agrees to Pay $549.5 million in Largest-Ever Trade-Related False Claims Act Settlement
On May 14, 2026, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois (NDIL) announced a new Individual Self-Disclosure Program offering qualifying individuals three potential forms of relief in exchange for voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation: letter immunity, a deferred or non-prosecution agreement, or criminal prosecution with substantial sentencing relief. The Program’s express three-tier structure distinguishes it from many other federal self-disclosure programs, which generally focus on the possibility of a non-prosecution or deferred prosecution agreement. To qualify, individuals must provide a complete and truthful proffer, cooperate fully with law enforcement, testify if required, and disgorge any criminal proceeds, among other requirements. This post summarizes the Program’s key features and highlights how it compares to similar self-disclosure initiatives adopted in other jurisdictions.
http://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Takayuki Onohttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngTakayuki Ono2026-05-15 15:27:402026-05-15 15:28:57Three Potential Benefits, One Powerful Incentive: NDIL’s New Individual Self-Disclosure Program
New SEC Enforcement Director David Woodcock used his first public remarks to signal continuity with Chairman Paul Atkins’s “back to basics” agenda, emphasizing “quality over quantity” and a focus on cases involving real investor harm rather than technical violations. Woodcock identified key enforcement priorities and announced reinstitution of the Retail Fraud Working Group to focus specifically on protecting retail investors.
http://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Ike Adamshttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngIke Adams2026-05-14 11:12:202026-05-14 11:12:21New U.S. SEC Enforcement Director David Woodcock Signals Continued “Back to Basics” Approach
As companies increasingly integrate generative and agentic AI into core business functions, a May 7, 2026 decision from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York1 highlights several fundamental guardrails for corporate legal and compliance departments to consider. Although the case arose in the context of government decision-making, the opinion carries broader implications for any entity that embeds generative AI in its processes.
http://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00David A. Gordonhttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngDavid A. Gordon2026-05-13 09:04:432026-05-12 17:10:52When “The Devil Made Me Do It” Is Not a Defense: Lessons in AI Governance and Organizational Oversight from an SDNY Decision
On May 7, 2026, Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva used his first major speech to the compliance community since DOJ’s March 2026 rollout of its department-wide Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) to deliver a clear message: corporate enforcement activity is expected to increase, companies should self-disclose misconduct early—even before completing internal investigations—and robust compliance programs remain central to DOJ’s expectations.
President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order on May 1, 2026, establishing a new U.S. sanctions program targeting Cuba that supplements existing sanctions. The Order gives the U.S. Secretaries of State and Treasury the authority to impose sanctions on non-U.S. persons, including foreign financial institutions, for engaging in certain activities in Cuba or involving sanctioned Cuban persons. It thus creates significant new risks for non-U.S. persons with respect to dealings in or involving Cuba.
http://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Maura Rezendeshttp://whitecollarwatch.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2026/03/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngMaura Rezendes2026-05-11 11:31:132026-05-11 11:31:13United States Announces New Cuba-Related Sanctions Program
Supreme Court’s First Choice Decision May Expand Federal Court Options to Recipients of State Attorney General CIDs
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport may create a new strategic consideration for recipients of state attorney general civil investigative demands (CIDs). In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that a nonprofit could pursue a Section 1983 challenge to a New Jersey Attorney General subpoena in federal court based on alleged First Amendment associational harms arising from compelled donor disclosure.
Although the Court emphasized the narrow nature of its holding, the decision potentially opens the door to federal court challenges where state attorney general CIDs implicate donor anonymity, expressive association, advocacy activities, or other constitutional interests. The ruling also reflects the Court’s continued willingness to recognize Article III standing based on alleged chilling effects tied to First Amendment rights.
Our latest post examines the decision, the arguments raised by a coalition of state attorneys general, and what the ruling may mean for companies, nonprofits, trade associations, and other recipients of state attorney general investigative demands
Kenneth G. Coffin
Dallas
kenneth.coffin@sidley.com
Michael D. Mann
New York
mdmann@sidley.com
Hao Zhu
Washington, D.C.
hao.zhu@sidley.com
Austin Severns
Washington, D.C.
austin.severns@sidley.com
SEC Rescinds Its Gag Rule Policy
The SEC yesterday rescinded its so-called gag rule policy prohibiting parties from denying the allegations in no admit/no deny settlements. The SEC also announced it would not enforce gag rule provisions in existing settlements (which it pointed out was not enforced previously). Even with this policy change, the SEC can still agree to no admit/no deny settlements, and it noted that it may continue to require admissions in some cases.
The practical effects of this policy change remain uncertain, but we can predict at least two possible consequences despite the fact that this will be a welcome change for some settling parties. First, the SEC staff may seek to include more detailed allegations in settled orders to make it more difficult for settling parties to deny the allegations. Second, some settling parties have viewed the gag rule as helpful because it constrained their public statements after a settlement. Without the ability to rely on the “no deny” language, those parties may now face pressure to say more, which could introduce new risks.
(more…)
Ike Adams
Washington, D.C.
iadams@sidley.com
Kathryn L. Alessi
Boston
kalessi@sidley.com
W. Hardy Callcott
San Francisco
wcallcott@sidley.com
Kevin J. Campion
Washington, D.C.
kcampion@sidley.com
Stephen L. Cohen
Washington, D.C., Boston, ...
scohen@sidley.com
Ranah Esmaili
Washington, D.C., New York
resmaili@sidley.com
Kenyon Hall
Boston
kenyon.hall@sidley.com
Elizabeth A. Marino
Boston
emarino@sidley.com
Ian McGinley
New York
ian.mcginley@sidley.com
Lara Mehraban
New York
lmehraban@sidley.com
Christopher R. Mills
Washington, D.C.
cmills@sidley.com
David S. Petron
Washington, D.C.
dpetron@sidley.com
John I. Sakhleh
Washington, D.C.
jsakhleh@sidley.com
Charles A. Sommers
Washington, D.C.
csommers@sidley.com
Simona K. Suh
New York
simona.suh@sidley.com
Corin R. Swift
New York, Boston
corin.swift@sidley.com
Lara C. Thyagarajan
New York, Boston
lthyagarajan@sidley.com
Paul M. Tyrrell
Boston
ptyrrell@sidley.com
Tariff Enforcement at the Forefront: Importer Agrees to Pay $549.5 million in Largest-Ever Trade-Related False Claims Act Settlement
On May 12, 2026, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced a $549.5 million settlement with Perfectus Aluminum Acquisitions LLC and four affiliated companies to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act (“FCA”) by evading customs duties. This settlement is the largest trade-related settlement under the FCA.
The action was initiated by qui tam cases brought by individuals who worked for U.S.-based competitors and the Aluminum Extrusion Counsel and ultimately coordinated through the DOJ’s Trade Fraud Task Force, which involved cooperation between DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security. This case highlights the increasing use of the FCA to hold importers liable for the underpayment of customs duties, the Administration’s commitment to enforcing U.S. customs laws, and the potential for competitors and former employees to harness the FCA to motivate federal investigations into allegations of trade fraud.
This post examines the settlement and discusses its implications for importers, manufacturers, and other companies facing customs and trade enforcement risk.
Kristin Graham Koehler
Washington, D.C.
kkoehler@sidley.com
Ted Murphy
Washington, D.C.
ted.murphy@sidley.com
Craig Francis Dukin
Washington, D.C.
cdukin@sidley.com
Aaron M. Applebaum
Washington, D.C.
aapplebaum@sidley.com
Gwen Ellis-Joyce
Washington, D.C.
gwen.ellisjoyce@sidley.com
Three Potential Benefits, One Powerful Incentive: NDIL’s New Individual Self-Disclosure Program
On May 14, 2026, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois (NDIL) announced a new Individual Self-Disclosure Program offering qualifying individuals three potential forms of relief in exchange for voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation: letter immunity, a deferred or non-prosecution agreement, or criminal prosecution with substantial sentencing relief. The Program’s express three-tier structure distinguishes it from many other federal self-disclosure programs, which generally focus on the possibility of a non-prosecution or deferred prosecution agreement. To qualify, individuals must provide a complete and truthful proffer, cooperate fully with law enforcement, testify if required, and disgorge any criminal proceeds, among other requirements. This post summarizes the Program’s key features and highlights how it compares to similar self-disclosure initiatives adopted in other jurisdictions.
Takayuki Ono
Chicago, Tokyo
tono@sidley.com
David H. Hoffman
Chicago
david.hoffman@sidley.com
Daniel D. Rubinstein
Chicago
drubinstein@sidley.com
Geeta Malhotra
Chicago
gmalhotra@sidley.com
Daniel C. Craig
Chicago
dcraig@sidley.com
Desiree Mitchell
Chicago
desiree.mitchell@sidley.com
New U.S. SEC Enforcement Director David Woodcock Signals Continued “Back to Basics” Approach
New SEC Enforcement Director David Woodcock used his first public remarks to signal continuity with Chairman Paul Atkins’s “back to basics” agenda, emphasizing “quality over quantity” and a focus on cases involving real investor harm rather than technical violations. Woodcock identified key enforcement priorities and announced reinstitution of the Retail Fraud Working Group to focus specifically on protecting retail investors.
Ike Adams
Washington, D.C.
iadams@sidley.com
Kathryn L. Alessi
Boston
kalessi@sidley.com
W. Hardy Callcott
San Francisco
wcallcott@sidley.com
Kevin J. Campion
Washington, D.C.
kcampion@sidley.com
Stephen L. Cohen
Washington, D.C., Boston, ...
scohen@sidley.com
Ranah Esmaili
Washington, D.C., New York
resmaili@sidley.com
Kenyon Hall
Boston
kenyon.hall@sidley.com
Elizabeth A. Marino
Boston
emarino@sidley.com
Ian McGinley
New York
ian.mcginley@sidley.com
Lara Mehraban
New York
lmehraban@sidley.com
Christopher R. Mills
Washington, D.C.
cmills@sidley.com
David S. Petron
Washington, D.C.
dpetron@sidley.com
John I. Sakhleh
Washington, D.C.
jsakhleh@sidley.com
Charles A. Sommers
Washington, D.C.
csommers@sidley.com
Simona K. Suh
New York
simona.suh@sidley.com
Corin R. Swift
New York, Boston
corin.swift@sidley.com
Lara C. Thyagarajan
New York, Boston
lthyagarajan@sidley.com
Paul M. Tyrrell
Boston
ptyrrell@sidley.com
When “The Devil Made Me Do It” Is Not a Defense: Lessons in AI Governance and Organizational Oversight from an SDNY Decision
As companies increasingly integrate generative and agentic AI into core business functions, a May 7, 2026 decision from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York1 highlights several fundamental guardrails for corporate legal and compliance departments to consider. Although the case arose in the context of government decision-making, the opinion carries broader implications for any entity that embeds generative AI in its processes.
(more…)
David A. Gordon
Chicago
dgordon@sidley.com
Takayuki Ono
Chicago, Tokyo
tono@sidley.com
Matt S. Jackson
Chicago
matthew.jackson@sidley.com
Daniel Lim
Washington, D.C.
daniel.lim@sidley.com
Kseniya K. Belysheva
Los Angeles
kbelysheva@sidley.com
“Don’t Wait”: DOJ Criminal Division Chief Signals Faster Disclosure Expectations and Uptick in Corporate Enforcement
On May 7, 2026, Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva used his first major speech to the compliance community since DOJ’s March 2026 rollout of its department-wide Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) to deliver a clear message: corporate enforcement activity is expected to increase, companies should self-disclose misconduct early—even before completing internal investigations—and robust compliance programs remain central to DOJ’s expectations.
Michael D. Mann
New York
mdmann@sidley.com
Lisa H. Miller
Washington, D.C.
lisa.miller@sidley.com
Daniel C. Craig
Chicago
dcraig@sidley.com
Asher J. Zlotnik
New York
asher.zlotnik@sidley.com
United States Announces New Cuba-Related Sanctions Program
President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order on May 1, 2026, establishing a new U.S. sanctions program targeting Cuba that supplements existing sanctions. The Order gives the U.S. Secretaries of State and Treasury the authority to impose sanctions on non-U.S. persons, including foreign financial institutions, for engaging in certain activities in Cuba or involving sanctioned Cuban persons. It thus creates significant new risks for non-U.S. persons with respect to dealings in or involving Cuba.
Maura Rezendes
Washington, D.C.
maura.rezendes@sidley.com
Jen Fernandez
Washington, D.C.
jen.fernandez@sidley.com
Andrew W. Shoyer
Washington, D.C.
ashoyer@sidley.com
Ben Vallimarescu
Washington, D.C.
ben.vallimarescu@sidley.com
James Daher
Washington, D.C.
james.daher@sidley.com
Lloyd Lyall
Washington, D.C.
lloyd.lyall@sidley.com
Mine Orer
Washington, D.C.
morer@sidley.com
Categories
Archives
Meet the Team
Douglas A. Axel
daxel@sidley.com
David H. Hoffman
david.hoffman@sidley.com
Joan M. Loughnane
jloughnane@sidley.com
Kenneth A. Polite Jr.
kpolite@sidley.com
Daniel D. Rubinstein
drubinstein@sidley.com
Yuet Ming Tham
ytham@sidley.com
Dave Anderson
dlanderson@sidley.com
Sheila A.G. Armbrust
sarmbrust@sidley.com
Ellyce R. Cooper
ecooper@sidley.com
Daniel C. Craig
dcraig@sidley.com
Alexandria Daugherty
adaugherty@sidley.com
Craig Francis Dukin
cdukin@sidley.com
Sara George
sara.george@sidley.com
Shu Min Ho
shumin.ho@sidley.com
Naomi A. Igra
naomi.igra@sidley.com
Kristin Graham Koehler
kkoehler@sidley.com
Scott R. Lassar
slassar@sidley.com
Michael A. Levy
mlevy@sidley.com
Geeta Malhotra
gmalhotra@sidley.com
Michael D. Mann
mdmann@sidley.com
Ian McGinley
ian.mcginley@sidley.com
Lisa H. Miller
lisa.miller@sidley.com
Paige Holden Montgomery
pmontgomery@sidley.com
Julia G. Mirabella
jmirabella@sidley.com
Takayuki Ono
tono@sidley.com
Matthew Podolsky
matthew.podolsky@sidley.com
Alexa Poletto
apoletto@sidley.com
Karen A. Popp
kpopp@sidley.com
Jacqueline Pruitt
jpruitt@sidley.com
Doreen M. Rachal
drachal@sidley.com
Kevin Rubino
krubino@sidley.com
Leslie A. Shubert
lshubert@sidley.com
David A. Silva
david.silva@sidley.com
Michele Tagliaferri
mtagliaferri@sidley.com
Frank R. Volpe
fvolpe@sidley.com
Marisa S. West
marisa.west@sidley.com
Angela M. Xenakis
axenakis@sidley.com
Kenneth G. Coffin
kenneth.coffin@sidley.com