Deterring Obstruction of Justice Efficiently: the Impact of Arthur Andersen and the Sarbanes-oxley Act
نویسندگان
چکیده
Recent changes to the law governing the obstruction of justice have coincided with a string of highly visible prosecutions, including those of Martha Stewart,1 Frank Quattrone,2 and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Jr.3 Among such prosecutions, that of the accounting firm Arthur Andersen LLP is foremost in legal significance. From the start, the government and Arthur Andersen disputed how the jury would be instructed as to the meaning of key elements of the crime of obstructing justice. The Supreme Court ultimately decided the dispute in an opinion that rejected the trial judge’s instructions, but otherwise left unanswered questions regarding the precise meaning of the crime’s key elements.4 After Andersen’s indictment but prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, Congress enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.5 Sarbanes-Oxley created new obstruction crimes,6 significantly broadening the reach of laws criminalizing obstruction of justice. In part, this legal change was a direct response to the difficulties in
منابع مشابه
The Significant Meaninglessness of Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States
Although I hate to begin a serious article on an important Supreme Court case this way, the Court’s recent decision in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States1 reminds me of nothing so much as the old Woody Allen line that ‘‘[s]ex without love is an empty experience . . . but as empty experiences go, it’s one of the best.’’2 This is because for all practical purposes, Andersen is a meaningless dec...
متن کاملOpen Access Andersen v. U.S.: Policy Implications and a Social Science Research Agenda
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the conviction of Arthur Andersen, LLP for its involvement in the Enron scandal. The Court held that that the jury instructions did not accurately convey the meaning of the witness tampering statute that Andersen was charged with. Since the original trial, relevant sections of the Criminal Code were updated with the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002). Alt...
متن کاملThe Effects of Audit Committee Activities and Deterring Fraud: an Empirical Investigation of the Predicted Effectiveness of the Sarbanes-oxley Act
The financial frauds of recent past have created a lot of attention to financial audits and corporate governance. That attention includes the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Act has led to numerous changes in corporate governance. But will the changes affect financial fraud? This research attempts to gather empirical evidence about audit committees, S-OX, and whether the guidelines of S-OX hav...
متن کاملDiscussion of A Lobbying Approach to Evaluating the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
=1204442. DUARTE, J.; K. KONG; L. A. YOUNG; AND S. SIEGEL. “Foreign Listings, U.S. Equity Markets, and the Impact of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2007. Working paper, University of Washington, 2007. ENGEL, E.; R. M. HAYES; AND X. WANG. “The Sarbanes–Oxley Act and Firms’ Going-Private Decisions.” Journal of Accounting & Economics 44 (2007): 116–45.FAMA, E., AND K. FRENCH. “Common Risk Factors in ...
متن کاملPart 1980—procedures for the Handling of Discrimination Complaints under Section 806 of the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Account- Ability Act of 2002, Title Viii of the Sarbanes-oxley Act
(a) This part implements procedures under section 806 of the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, Title VIII of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (‘‘Sarbanes-Oxley’’ or ‘‘Act’’), enacted into law July 30, 2002. Sarbanes-Oxley provides for employee protection from discrimination by companies and representatives of companies because the employee has engaged in protected activity ...
متن کامل