FinCEN\u2019s Southwest Border Geographic Targeting Order (SWB GTO) for enhanced reporting requirements in certain zip codes appears to have been adopted without proper authority under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Fourth Amendment claim is deferred until later as unnecessary at this point. Novedades v. Fin. Crimes Enf’t Network, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101156 (S.D. Cal. May 21, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Franks challenge to CSLI warrant fails: \u201cValentin has failed to show that the statements regarding what the surveillance footage showed were inaccurate, much less reflective of deliberate or reckless falsehood. Valentin has failed to show that the statements in the affidavit do not reflect events that Officer Bonacarti observed on in-store video\u2014but that simply were not captured on the video agents downloaded. As to mens rea, even if it were posited that Officer Bonacarti actually misrepresented the contents of the video he reviewed in the store, Valentin has failed to show that Ford acted with reckless disregard for the truth or deliberately lied when he incorporated Officer Bonacarti’s statements into his search warrant affidavit.\u201d United States v. Valentin, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101280 (E.D.N.Y. May 28, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant doesn\u2019t get released pretrial. His reference to \u201cemerging Fourth Amendment jurisprudence\u201d doesn\u2019t show the court he\u2019s likely to prevail on his suppression motion, and, if he doesn\u2019t, the proof is overwhelming against him. United States v. Jordan, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101262 (D.D.C. May 23, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
FinCEN\u2019s Southwest Border Geographic Targeting Order (SWB GTO) for enhanced reporting requirements in certain zip codes appears to have been adopted without proper authority under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Fourth Amendment claim is deferred until later as unnecessary at … Continue reading