Three Supreme Court Decisions
Richlin Security Service v. Chertoff: A prevailing party may recover its paralegal fees from the government at market rates under the Equal Access to Justice Act (i.e., what the party paid to its attorneys), and not be limited to “reasonable costs” (i.e., what the firm actually paid for its paralegals). Justice Alito wrote the opinion, joined by all of the justices, although Justices Scalia and Thomas did not sign on to a few sections. The decision is available here; the argument transcript is available here.
U.S. v. Santos: The High Court affirmed the 7th Circuit’s holding that, under the federal money-laundering statute, the term “proceeds” applies only to transactions involving criminal profits, not criminal receipts (i.e., it applies to the amount of money “earned,” not the gross amount taken in). Justice Scalia announced the plurality decision, joined by 3 other justices. Justice Stevens concurred in the judgment only, and thus wrote the controlling opinion. Justice Alito dissented, joined by 3 justices, and Justice Breyer wrote a separate dissent. The decision is available here; the argument transcript is available here. SCOTUSBlog has more on the precedential effect of the various opinions.
Cuellar v. U.S.: The court defined money laundering as requiring more than mere evidence that funds were concealed during transport, but that the purpose of the transport (and not just its effect) was to conceal or disguise the funds’ nature, location, source, ownership, or control. Justice Thomas delivered the Court’s unanimous opinion. Justice Alito wrote a concurring opinion, joined by Justices Roberts and Kennedy. The decision is available here; the argument transcript is available here.