AI workflows for revenue teams
Placeholder house ad for Conservus.ai. Swap with final creative when brand assets are ready.
Partner with Conservus.aiLatest Cases & Updates
Rights explainers, case coverage, and defense-oriented reporting.
Chatrie v. United States Could End Geofence Warrants: Why the Supreme Court Is About to Decide If Police Can Dragnet Everyone Near a Crime Scene
The Supreme Court will rule by late June 2026 on whether police can use geofence warrants to sweep up every phone near a crime scene. Here is what Chatrie v. United States means for your Fourth Amendment rights.
Culley v. Marshall Said No Prompt Hearing Required. State Legislatures Are Saying Otherwise in 2026.
After the Supreme Court ruled in Culley v. Marshall that no prompt post-seizure hearing is constitutionally required, Washington, Colorado, Oklahoma, and other states moved to guarantee one anyway. Here is what the new laws mean for defense lawyers and owners.
Counterman's Recklessness Standard Is Killing Social Media 'True Threat' Prosecutions: Why Posts Defendants Never Read Their Audience Aren't Crimes
After Counterman v. Colorado, prosecutors must prove a defendant consciously disregarded the risk a post would read as a threat. On broadcast platforms, that proof is collapsing.
Snyder v. United States Two Years In: Why Federal § 666 Bribery Cases Against State and Local Officials Are Collapsing
Two years after the Supreme Court's 6-3 Snyder decision, district courts are vacating § 666 bribery counts and forcing DOJ to rebuild public-corruption cases. Here is what changed, why the ComEd Four got a partial retrial, and what defendants charged under federal bribery laws should be filing in the next 30 to 90 days.
Rahimi One Year Later: How Domestic Violence Gun Surrender Orders Are Still Getting Reversed on Procedural Grounds
One year after the Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on gun possession for people under domestic violence protective orders, defense lawyers are still winning as-applied challenges. The reason: most state protective-order forms never memorialize the findings Rahimi actually required.
Barrett v. United States Was Not About Felon-in-Possession: The Real Status of § 922(g)(1) After January 2026
Many federal defenders heard that Barrett v. United States would force the Supreme Court to decide felon-in-possession challenges by June 2026. That is not what Barrett decided. Here is the actual landscape for § 922(g)(1) cases.
AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material Is Now Being Charged Federally: Why the First Conviction Will Set Precedent
The Justice Department has begun prosecuting entirely AI-generated child sexual abuse material under a hybrid charging theory that pairs 18 U.S.C. 2256 with the PROTECT Act's obscenity statute. The first federal conviction will likely set the constitutional baseline for every case that follows.
Deepfake Evidence in Criminal Court: What Defense Lawyers Are Filing Before Federal Rule 901(c) Takes Effect
The amended Federal Rule of Evidence 901(c) is not yet in force, and the earliest possible effective date is December 1, 2027. Defense lawyers are not waiting. Here is what they are filing now under existing Rules 901, 702, and 403, and how the pending rulemaking is already shifting the gatekeeping standard.
Luigi Mangione's Federal Death Penalty Case: Why a Manhattan Jury Will Never Vote on Execution
A January 30, 2026 ruling by Judge Margaret Garnett and the Justice Department's decision not to appeal mean a Manhattan federal jury will never deliberate on whether Luigi Mangione lives or dies. The capital count fell on the elements, not the evidence.
United States v. Hemani: Why the Justices Sound Ready to Strike the Gun Ban on Marijuana Users
The Supreme Court heard United States v. Hemani on March 2, 2026, and a majority of justices sounded skeptical of the federal law that bars drug users from owning firearms. Here is what 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3) actually prohibits, how the case reached the Court, and what a ruling could mean for defendants charged with possessing a gun while using a controlled substance.
After VanDerStok: How Ghost Gun Defenses Are Still Winning Motions in Federal Court
The Supreme Court upheld the ATF's ghost gun rule, but only against a facial challenge. The real federal fight has moved to scienter, as-applied scope, and suppression, and defenders are winning motions on every front.
Virginia's New 'Assault Firearm' Law: Misdemeanor Charges, a Three-Year Gun Ban, and What Owners Should Do Before July 1
Virginia's HB217/SB749 takes effect July 1, 2026. Contrary to widely circulated claims, the new ban creates Class 1 misdemeanor exposure plus a three-year firearm prohibition, not felony charges. Here is what is actually criminalized, what is grandfathered, and how the pending Bruen-based litigation could reshape enforcement.
Vindictive Prosecution Just Killed the Abrego García Case: How Federal Defenders Are Using the Doctrine to Get Indictments Dismissed in 2026
A Tennessee federal judge dismissed the human-smuggling indictment against Kilmar Abrego García on May 22, 2026, finding the Government failed to rebut a presumption of vindictive prosecution. Here is how defense lawyers can replicate the template.
37 Days in Jail for a Meme: How a $835,000 Settlement Shows First Amendment Retaliation Claims Can Pay
Larry Bushart spent 37 days in a Tennessee jail on a $2 million bond after posting a Trump meme on Facebook. On May 20, 2026, Perry County paid him $835,000 to settle his Section 1983 lawsuit. Here is how plaintiffs are turning wrongful speech arrests into six-figure payouts.
The Shadow Docket Is Quietly Rewriting Criminal Procedure: Why Defense Lawyers Are Now Tracking Emergency Orders
Unsigned Supreme Court emergency orders are now functioning as de facto precedent on stays of execution, habeas timing, and Fourth Amendment suppression. Defense lawyers are tracking the docket nightly, and Congress has filed two waves of reform bills.
Alex Murdaugh Is Suing the Court Clerk in Federal Court: How Jury Tampering Claims Become a Path to a New Trial
South Carolina's Supreme Court already vacated Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions over a court clerk's jury interference. Days later he sued her in federal court. Here is how a jury-tampering claim actually unwinds a conviction, and why the civil suit is a separate track.
A Federal Jury Would Not Convict: Why Assault-on-a-Federal-Officer Cases From Protests Keep Ending in Mistrials
A Portland jury deadlocked over a felony assault-on-a-federal-officer charge. It is part of a pattern. Here is what 18 U.S.C. § 111 requires, what a hung jury means, and why a retrial does not violate double jeopardy.
18 USC 119 Is the New Federal Speech Crime: Why a Guilty Plea for Doxxing a Supreme Court Justice Signals a Wider Prosecution Wave
A North Carolina man's guilty plea to posting a Supreme Court justice's home address tests a 2008 federal statute now central to online speech cases. What 18 U.S.C. § 119 actually criminalizes, how the First Amendment fight will run, and what defense lawyers need to know.
Hallucinated Citations and $5K Sanctions: Why Criminal Defense Lawyers Using AI Are One Brief Away From Disbarment in 2026
A federal judge's May 9, 2026 sanctions order in Coomer v. Lindell underscores how AI-generated fake citations are now triggering five-figure penalties, bar discipline, and dismissed criminal cases. For defenders, the verification duty is no longer optional.
Nitrogen Hypoxia Reaches the Supreme Court: Why Capital Defenders Think the Eighth Amendment Wall May Finally Hold
After Anthony Boyd's 38-minute October 2025 nitrogen execution in Alabama, capital defenders are positioning Jeffrey Lee's June 11, 2026 case as the next Supreme Court vehicle to test the protocol under Glossip v. Gross.