Biskupic Stepping Down

Our graduate and adjunct faculty member Steven Biskupic announced yesterday that he is stepping down from his post as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, effective January 9.  Steve made us proud over his six years of distinguished service in this important position, winning convictions in many high-profile public corruption cases.  It is customary for U.S. Attorneys to resign after a new President is elected, but this is one instance in which the community may be ill-served by the custom.  Best wishes, Steve, in your new endeavors!

Steve’s counterpart in the Western District, Erik Peterson (who is also a Marquette alum), has not yet announced his plans.

Continue ReadingBiskupic Stepping Down

Professor Esenberg on Crawford and the Scope of Employee Protections From Retaliation

Rick Esenberg has a new podcast on the Federalist Society website, in which he comments on Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee.  Crawford, currently pending before the United States Supreme Court, deals with the scope of the antiretaliation provisions of Title VII.  Rick’s podcast provides a succinct and helpful summary and assessment of the facts and arguments in the case.

Continue ReadingProfessor Esenberg on Crawford and the Scope of Employee Protections From Retaliation

Seventh Circuit Week in Review: Machine Guns and Cocaine (And What Thanksgiving Is Complete Without Those?)

The Seventh Circuit had three new opinions in criminal cases in this holiday-shortened work week, with the government winning on all of the major issues in each appeal. 

In the first, United States v. Carmel (No. 07-3906), the Seventh Circuit (per Judge Manion) affirmed the defendant’s conviction for possessing an unregistered machine gun in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861.  In addition to raising some case-specific issues relating to a search warrant, the defendant also argued that § 5861 was invalid in light of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), which criminalizes possession of machine guns.  In essence, Carmel argued that § 5861, which punishes people for not registering their machine guns, makes no sense when § 922(o) effectively precludes registration.  The Tenth Circuit bought this argument in United States v. Dalton, 960 F.2d 121 (10th Cir. 1992), but it was subsequently rejected in seven other circuits.  And now the Seventh Circuit makes eight.  It’s not clear to me, though, why the government would ever charge a defendant like Carmel under § 5861 when § 922(o) is also applicable and carries the same maximum penalty — why not render the Dalton issue moot by using § 922(o) exclusively in these cases?

Continue ReadingSeventh Circuit Week in Review: Machine Guns and Cocaine (And What Thanksgiving Is Complete Without Those?)