Pretextual Wiretapping: Raj Rajaratnam and Perfect Hedge

            What do Raj Rajaratnam and a mafioso have in common? While that might be a loaded question, to direct the discussion, both have received similar treatment from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Rajaratnam’s recent conviction for securities fraud by way of insider trading came about through the use of evidence obtained by wiretapping. Wiretapping is a common technique used by the FBI to help build cases against members of organized crime under the Racketeer Influenced and Organized Crime Act (RICO). Referred to by the FBI as operation “Perfect Hedge,” the United States has begun to use wiretapping to prosecute insider trading. Just last year, a federal judge upheld the use of wiretapping against Rajaratnam. Even though insider trading is not a crime that can support a wiretapping application, Rajaratnam’s motion to suppress the evidence obtained from his wiretap was denied. The case of Raj Read the rest

What’s Mine is Yours: Takings After Kelo

“The sacred rights of property are to be guarded at every point. I call them sacred, because, if they are unprotected, all other rights become worthless or visionary.” Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1852.


Security in ones’ property has been a fundamental tenant of our society since its inception.  The Fifth Amendment enumerates this vital right and has served as a refuge against the government unjustly interfering with individual property rights for centuries. But, as judicial interpretation develops over time, a startling trend has emerged that could profoundly shape the future of the taking of private lands by the government. The landmark case of Kelo v. City of New London marked a radical shift in what could be construed as a legitimate taking based on a state’s police power. (1) This ruling has resulted in many states drafting new legislation in an attempt to temper the controversial ruling. (2) Read the rest

United States’ Last Chance to Save Cotton Subsidies?

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), over the past ten years the United States has given about 24 billion dollars worth of cotton subsidies despite the fact that the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled that United States cotton subsidies are illegal.1

            The WTO’s dispute over United States cotton subsidies started in 2002 when Brazil brought a lawsuit against the United States. Brazil claimed that the United States failed to comply with its commitments made in both the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, which sought for WTO member nations to reduce agricultural subsidies. In 2004 the WTO found that United States cotton subsidies were inconsistent with WTO commitments and recommended the subsidies be removed in a reasonable amount of time. Specifically, the WTO found payments to cotton producers under the GSM-102 program, a United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) program Read the rest