<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>arent Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros</title>
	<atom:link href="https://homesafetytechpros.com/tag/arent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://homesafetytechpros.com/tag/arent/</link>
	<description>Home Safety Tech Pros</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 17:01:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal under false statements law, Supreme Court says</title>
		<link>https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/</link>
					<comments>https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[homesafetytechpros]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 17:01:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Crime News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[7th Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABA Journal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Banking Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Collections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illinois]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misleading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trials & Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White Collar Crime]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Home Daily News Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal… U.S. Supreme Court Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal under false statements law, Supreme Court says By Debra Cassens Weiss March 24, 2025, 3:41 pm CDT A federal law that makes it a crime to knowingly make false statements to influence the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. does not [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/">Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal under false statements law, Supreme Court says</a> appeared first on <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com">Home Safety Tech Pros</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <br />
</p>
<div id="story_page_body" style="margin:0; padding:0; max-width:750px;">
		<!-- begin main content area --></p>
<ol class="breadcrumb">
<li><a href="https://www.abajournal.com/" title="Home">Home</a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.abajournal.com/news/" title="Read the Daily News">Daily News</a></li>
<li class="active">Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal…</li>
</ol>
<p>U.S. Supreme Court</p>
<h2>Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal under false statements law, Supreme Court says</h2>
<p>			<!-- toolbar --></p>
<p class="byline">By <a href="https://www.abajournal.com/authors/4/" title="View this author's information" style="color:{default_link_color};">Debra Cassens Weiss</a></p>
<p class="dateline"><time>March 24, 2025, 3:41 pm CDT</time></p>
<p>				<!-- primary story image --></p>
<div class="floating_image" style="max-width:750px; margin:20px 10px 10px 0;">
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/scotus-louisiana-OM7YSPNCFJ3H57ZONDQ54JQFEU.png" alt="SCOTUS building with shadow" width="450"/></p>
<p><em>A federal law that makes it a crime to knowingly make false statements to influence the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. does not punish statements that are merely misleading, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday. (Photo by Allison Robbert/The Washington Post)</em></p>
</p></div>
<p>				<!-- end primary story image --></p>
<p>			<!--no pagination logic--></p>
<p>A federal law that makes it a crime to knowingly make false statements to influence the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. does not punish statements that are merely misleading, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday.</p>
<p>The high court ruled for Patrick Daley Thompson, a lawyer and a former alderman who is the grandson of former Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley and the nephew of former Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/03/court-rules-for-former-chicago-alderman-on-false-statement-charges">SCOTUSblog </a>reports. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the unanimous <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-1095_8mjp.pdf">March 21 decision</a>.</p>
<p>According to SCOTUSblog, the decision “was the most recent of a series of rulings over the past several years in which the court has pushed back against a broader reading of federal criminal laws by prosecutors.”</p>
<p>Other publications covering the opinion include <a href="https://www.law360.com/legalethics/articles/2314148">Law360</a>, <a href="https://www.wbez.org/politics/2025/03/21/supreme-court-patrick-daley-thompson">WBEZ</a>, the <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/03/21/supreme-court-tosses-convictions-on-two-counts-for-former-11th-ward-alderman-patrick-daley-thompson">Chicago Tribune</a> and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/21/us/politics/supreme-court-chicago-politician-fraud.html">New York Times</a>.</p>
<p>Thompson had received three loans totaling $219,000 from the Washington Federal Bank for Savings over a three-year period. The first loan of $110,000 was used to make an equity payment to his law firm. The second loan was for $20,000, and the third loan was for $89,000. The FDIC became responsible for collecting outstanding loans after the bank failed in 2017.</p>
<p>Thompson told the FDIC’s loan servicer and two FDIC contractors that he had borrowed $110,000. Thompson maintained that his statement was misleading but not false because he referred only to the first $110,000 loan. He later agreed to settle the debt for $219,000.</p>
<p>Thompson was convicted in February 2022, and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Chicago affirmed. The Supreme Court vacated the appellate decision.</p>
<p>“Given that some misleading statements are also true, it is significant that the statute uses only the word ‘false,’” Roberts wrote in the unanimous opinion. “In casual conversation, people use many overlapping words to describe shady statements: false, misleading, dishonest, deceptive, literally true and more. Only one of those words appears in the statute.”</p>
<p>The Supreme Court did not decide whether the conviction could be upheld because Thompson’s statement was false. The issue can be addressed on remand, Roberts said.</p>
<p>Thompson has already served his sentence of four months in prison, according to WBEZ. He was also convicted for filing false tax returns, but that was not an issue in the appeal.</p>
<p>The case is <em>Thompson v. United States</em>.</p>
<p>			<a href="http://www.abajournal.com/contact?referrer=https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says" class="feedback-cta"><br />
    Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.<br />
</a></p></div>
<p><script src="https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#appId=250025978358202&amp;xfbml=1"></script><br />
<br /><br />
<br /><a href="https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/?utm_source=feeds&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=site_rss_feeds">Source link </a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/">Merely misleading statements aren’t illegal under false statements law, Supreme Court says</a> appeared first on <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com">Home Safety Tech Pros</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://homesafetytechpros.com/merely-misleading-statements-arent-illegal-under-false-statements-law-supreme-court-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<media:content url="https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/scotus-louisiana-OM7YSPNCFJ3H57ZONDQ54JQFEU.png" medium="image"></media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>JD Vance claims judges &#8216;aren&#8217;t allowed&#8217; to overrule Trump</title>
		<link>https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/</link>
					<comments>https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[homesafetytechpros]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2025 05:54:52 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Crime News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allowed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[donald trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[executive orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[overrule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vance]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, stand on stage at a campaign rally at North Carolina Aviation Museum, Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2024, in Asheboro, N.C. (AP Photo/Julia Nikhinson). Vice President JD Vance took to X on Sunday and suggested that President Donald Trump has “legitimate [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/">JD Vance claims judges &#8216;aren&#8217;t allowed&#8217; to overrule Trump</a> appeared first on <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com">Home Safety Tech Pros</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <br />
</p>
<div id="post-body">
<div id="attachment_482793" style="width: 1210px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-482793" class="size-full wp-image-482793" src="https://am21.mediaite.com/lc/cnt/uploads/2024/09/AP24234763183231.jpg" alt="Donald Trump, JD Vance" width="1200" height="627"/></p>
<p id="caption-attachment-482793" class="wp-caption-text">Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, stand on stage at a campaign rally at North Carolina Aviation Museum, Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2024, in Asheboro, N.C. (AP Photo/Julia Nikhinson).</p>
</div>
<p>Vice President <a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/obviously-you-shouldnt-be-pardoned-jd-vance-breaks-from-trumps-had-no-choice-claims-about-jan-6-rioters-and-says-violent-offenders-should-stay-locked-up-and-charged/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JD Vance</a> took to X on Sunday and suggested that <a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/unfair-competition-trump-now-wants-20-billion-from-cbs-over-kamala-harris-60-minutes-interview-as-he-amends-lawsuit-to-add-new-claims-and-a-co-plaintiff/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">President Donald Trump</a> has “legitimate power” to ignore judges when carrying out executive orders, claiming courts “aren’t allowed” to <a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/false-and-repugnant-states-and-doctors-team-up-to-block-trumps-executive-order-on-transgender-medical-care-lawsuit-seeks-permanent-injunction/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">overrule the new POTUS</a>.</p>
<p>“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” Vance <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> in an X post. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”</p>
<aside class="o-callout__recirculate o-callout"/>
<p>Earlier on Sunday morning, Vance <a href="https://x.com/Vermeullarmine/status/1888376498383618100" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shared a post</a> from Harvard Law School professor Adrian Vermeule, who claimed: “Judicial interference with legitimate acts of state, especially the internal functioning of a co-equal branch, is a violation of the separation of powers.”</p>
<p>On Sunday evening, Vance <a href="https://x.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1888705522045788249" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shared a post</a> from columnist and trial lawyer Kurt Schlichter, which said: “What if the judicial decision is lawless? A key component of the constitutional framework is judicial modesty, which is backed up by the fact that the judiciary has nothing to compel obedience, except its credibility.”</p>
<p>Vance’s signaling came after tech billionaire and DOGE leader Elon Musk voiced his disapproval of being blocked, along with the Department of Government Efficiency, by <a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/no-one-is-above-the-law-federal-court-blocks-musk-and-doge-from-accessing-sensitive-government-data-orders-employees-to-destroy-all-copies-and-downloads/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a federal judge</a> from accessing sensitive information provided by the Treasury Department.</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.</p>
<p>If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.</p>
<p>Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.</p>
<p>— JD Vance (@JDVance) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/1888607143030391287?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2025</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Resharing a post from an account called “Insurrection Barbie” on X, Musk suggested that Trump could step in and do something if judges continued to go against him in court.</p>
<p>“I don’t like the precedent it sets when you defy a judicial ruling, but I’m just wondering what other options are these judges leaving us,” the <a href="https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/1888366433886708011" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> said.</p>
<p>Vance, Musk and others who have floated the possibility of Trump ignoring federal rulings have gotten serious pushback and criticism online, with lawmakers and experts calling them out on social media.</p>
<p>“It’s called the ‘rule of law’ @jdvance,” <a href="https://x.com/danielsgoldman/status/1888644011868520905" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a> Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY), lead counsel for Trump’s first impeachment, on X. “Our constitution created three co-equal branches of government to provide checks and balances on each other (‘separation of powers’). The judiciary makes sure that the executive follows the law. If you do, then you won’t have problems.”</p>
<p>Georgetown Law professor Stephen Vladeck wrote, “Just to say the quiet part out loud, the point of having unelected judges in a democracy is so that *whether* acts of state are ‘legitimate’ can be decided by someone other than the people who are undertaking them.”</p>
<p>Former Rep. Liz Cheney said, “If you believe any of the multiple federal courts that have ruled against you so far are exceeding their statutory or Constitutional authority, your recourse is to appeal. You don’t get to rage-quit the Republic just because you are losing. That’s tyranny.”</p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Just to say the quiet part out loud, the point of having unelected judges in a democracy is so that *whether* acts of state are “legitimate” can be decided by someone other than the people who are undertaking them.</p>
<p>Vermeule knows this, of course. So does Vance. <a href="https://t.co/Hu4fAljPxt">pic.twitter.com/Hu4fAljPxt</a></p>
<p>— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) <a href="https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1888581987532788100?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2025</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Since Trump took office and began issuing executive orders, judges have been stepping up to stop or delay his actions in multiple districts across the country.</p>
<p>A federal judge in Rhode Island, for instance, has <a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/congress-has-not-given-the-executive-limitless-power-federal-judge-torches-trump-admin-with-order-blocking-spending-freeze-says-actions-violate-the-constitution/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">barred the Trump administration</a> from enforcing its murky and controversial federal spending freeze by issuing a temporary restraining order late last month. In Washington state, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order in mid-January halting Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship in the United States.</p>
<p>“This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,” said U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, during a hearing last month.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/unfair-competition-trump-now-wants-20-billion-from-cbs-over-kamala-harris-60-minutes-interview-as-he-amends-lawsuit-to-add-new-claims-and-a-co-plaintiff/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">More from Law&amp;Crime: ‘Unfair competition’: Trump now wants $20 billion from CBS over Kamala Harris ’60 Minutes’ interview as he amends lawsuit to add new claims and a co-plaintiff</a></strong></p>
<p>New York Attorney General Letitia James was celebrating a victory against the Trump administration on Friday as she and a 19-state coalition secured a temporary restraining order that was granted blocking DOGE’s access to the sensitive treasury info.</p>
<p>“From the moment Elon Musk and his DOGE employees gained unprecedented access to our personal private data, state bank account details, and other sensitive information, Americans across the country have been horrified,” James said in a statement. “We knew the Trump administration’s choice to give this access to unauthorized individuals was illegal, and this morning, a federal court agreed.”</p>
<p>The White House has not responded to media requests for comment on Vance’s post or whether Trump plans to fight any of the judges’ rulings. He has yet to say whether he will do so.</p>
</div>
<p><script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><script>
  (function(d, s, id) {
    var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
    if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
    js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
    js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";
    fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
  }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));
</script><br />
<br /><br />
<br /><a href="https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-president-trump-on-executive-orders-suggests-potus-has-legitimate-power-to-defy-judicial-rulings/">Source link </a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/">JD Vance claims judges &#8216;aren&#8217;t allowed&#8217; to overrule Trump</a> appeared first on <a href="https://homesafetytechpros.com">Home Safety Tech Pros</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://homesafetytechpros.com/jd-vance-claims-judges-arent-allowed-to-overrule-trump/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<media:content url="https://lawandcrime.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/AP24234763183231.jpg" medium="image"></media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
