Clear and Present Danger: DOJ Trade Fraud and Anti-Corruption Priorities Signal Lasting Compliance Risk
This article, “Clear and Present Danger: How U.S. Department of Justice Trade-Fraud and Anti-Corruption Priorities Show Trade and Customs Risks Are Here to Stay,” published in The Global Trade Law Journal, examines the DOJ’s increased focus on trade fraud, tariff evasion and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act risks. The authors highlight key enforcement trends, including expanded whistleblower incentives and renewed use of the Trade Fraud Task Force, and explain how these developments are driving more aggressive investigations. The article also outlines practical steps companies can take to strengthen trade compliance, enhance oversight of third-party intermediaries and reduce enforcement risk.
New Guidance on U.S. Procurement Raises Risk to Federal Contractors From Potentially Discriminatory Practices
The Trump Administration is advancing a coordinated effort to tie federal funding and contracting eligibility more closely to its interpretation of antidiscrimination law. Recent Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) guidance directs agencies to incorporate a new contract clause prohibiting practices the Administration deems discriminatory, while proposed revisions to System for Award Management (SAM) certifications would require recipients of federal grants and other financial assistance to affirm compliance with similar standards. These developments build on earlier Department of Justice guidance outlining the types of conduct the Administration views as unlawful and are reinforced by a recent False Claims Act (FCA) settlement signaling a willingness to pursue enforcement in this area. Together, the FAR changes and proposed SAM revisions point to a more integrated enforcement framework—one that expands certification and disclosure obligations, links compliance more directly to FCA materiality, and increases oversight and reporting expectations. For federal contractors and grant recipients, the result is a heightened risk environment requiring careful reassessment of policies, internal controls, and subcontractor compliance in anticipation of greater scrutiny from both contracting agencies and enforcement authorities.
DOJ and DEA Loosen Medical Marijuana Restrictions and Move Toward Broader Rescheduling
On April 22, 2026, DOJ and DEA took two coordinated steps that could reshape—though not resolve—the federal treatment of marijuana. First, they issued a final order placing certain FDA-approved and state-licensed medical marijuana products in Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. At the same time, DEA announced an expedited hearing on a separate proposal to reclassify marijuana more broadly from Schedule I to Schedule III, with proceedings set to begin in late June. Together, these actions signal movement toward a less restrictive federal framework, but their immediate impact is narrower than it may appear: the final order applies only to a limited subset of medical marijuana products and leaves most cannabis activity subject to existing federal controls. For industry participants, the developments introduce a more compliance-driven, state license-dependent pathway today, while setting the stage for potentially more significant changes in the months ahead.
April Antitrust and Competition Bulletin: Top-of-Mind Global Antitrust Issues
Sidley’s global Antitrust and Competition team recently shared its perspectives on key antitrust issues currently top of mind—and why they matter for businesses. The April Antitrust and Competition Bulletin highlights continued scrutiny by the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission of labor markets, including noncompete agreements and talent-focused transactions, as well as evolving enforcement approaches to information exchanges, as reflected in the DOJ’s recent statement in In re Turkey Antitrust Litigation. It also examines the growing willingness of state Attorneys General to act independently of federal enforcers, signaling an increasingly complex enforcement landscape. In addition, the team addresses notable international developments, including leadership changes at the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition and new guidance on the interplay between the Digital Markets Act and the General Data Protection Regulation. The Bulletin further explores how these developments may affect businesses.
Clayton Addresses the Uncertainty Surrounding SDNY’s Self-Disclosure Program
On April 14, 2026, at a conference hosted by New York University School of Law’s Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement, Jay Clayton, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), publicly addressed whether the Department of Justice (DOJ)’s recently announced Department-wide Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Program (CEP) supersedes SDNY’s own Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure and Cooperation Program (the SDNY Program). Clayton stated that the two policies are not in tension and that his Office continues to invite companies to self-report misconduct under the SDNY Program.
U.S. DOJ Implements Uniform Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Framework Across All Components Except Antitrust
On March 10, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ or the Department) announced a new Department-wide Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy (CEP). For the first time, the policy establishes a uniform framework governing corporate enforcement decisions across all DOJ components, including U.S. Attorneys’ Offices nationwide, with the exception of the Antitrust Division, which will maintain its separate and longstanding leniency policy. DOJ’s stated goal for the CEP is to promote greater consistency, predictability, transparency, and fairness in DOJ’s prosecutions of corporate criminal matters.
Sidley Secures Early Termination of Corporate Probation in Clean Air Act Matter for Leading Aftermarket Automotive Company
Sidley obtained the early termination of corporate probation, along with relief from all remaining unpaid criminal fines, for a leading aftermarket automotive company in United States v. Rudy’s Performance Parts, Inc., Case No. 24-cr-00336 (D.D.C. Mar. 12, 2026).
The result comes amid an important shift in federal criminal enforcement under the Clean Air Act, a cornerstone federal environmental law governing vehicle emissions. The prior prosecution involved alleged tampering with motor vehicle on-board diagnostic (“OBD”) emissions systems — the systems commonly associated with a vehicle’s “check engine” functions — under a charging theory that the U.S. Department of Justice announced in January 2026 should no longer be pursued criminally. Sidley secured the result through an unopposed motion to terminate probation and fines.
Antitrust Crime Enforcement May Escalate Under New Chief
A recent speech by Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Daniel Glad signals that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division will continue actively pursuing criminal antitrust violations, with a focus on individual accountability and significant prison sentences as a deterrent. Glad also highlighted increased enforcement activity, the expanding role of the Procurement Collusion Strike Force, and the impact of the new antitrust whistleblower rewards program. Read the full article to learn more about what these developments could mean for companies and their compliance programs.
