This Supreme Court case revolves around the issue of sovereign immunity in the context of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, established under the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA). The key legal principle established is that statutory language must be unmistakably clear in
This case examines whether a private citizen with significant influence over government decision-making can be convicted of honest-services wire fraud. The key legal principle established is the clarification of the scope and applicability of honest-services fraud, particularly regarding private individuals who exert substantial influence over public officials or governmental decisions.
This case revolves around the invalidity of the "right-to-control" theory under federal fraud statutes. The Supreme Court held that the right to valuable economic information needed to make discretionary economic decisions is not a traditional property interest, and thus, cannot form the basis for a conviction under federal fraud statutes.
This case clarifies that Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, which concerns the validity of a sale or lease of property in a bankruptcy context, is not a jurisdictional provision. This means that the provision does not limit the court's power to hear a case but rather governs the
This case addressed whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) grants immunity to foreign state-owned entities in U.S. criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the FSIA, which primarily governs civil cases against foreign states, does not extend to criminal cases. This key doctrine establishes that foreign entities, like