Supreme Court Denies Stolt-Nielsen's Certiorari Petition Challenging the DOJ's Decision to Prosecution
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.31.06
The Supreme Court denied Stolt-Nielsen's cert petition challenge the Department of Justice's Antitrust Divisions' decision to prosecution the corporation which had previously been granted immunity exchange for its cooperation in an antitrust investigation. Stolt-Nielsen had initially received leniency in exchange for providing information in the alleged customer allocation and bid-rigging in the liquid-cargo shipping market. The Antitrust Division later decided to lift the immunity when it decided Stolt-Nielsen had not lived up to the immunity agreement. After the Court's decision, Stolt-Nielsen announced that it will file a motion to dismiss the indictment based upon the amnesty agreement, on Nov. 22, in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
