Trending
2023 Has Brought Mixed News for Death Penalty Abolitionists
2023 Has Brought Mixed News for Death Penalty Abolitionists
By
What Precisely Did Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis Do Wrong?
What Precisely Did Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis Do Wrong?
By
Personal Jurisdiction Makes Strange Bedfellows: An Assessment of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
Personal Jurisdiction Makes Strange Bedfellows: An Assessment of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
By and
Jon May
Jon May

Jon May’s practice — Team Defense — focuses on the representation of individuals under investigation or prosecution for federal criminal offenses. Jon May is a federal criminal defense attorney, available to undertake representation in prosecutions involving Health Care Fraud, Money Laundering, PPP and EIDL Fraud, Securities and Commodities Fraud, violations of the FCPA, Crypto Currency and NFT Fraud as well as other violations of federal criminal statutes and regulations.

Mr. May has handled some of the most important criminal cases of the last three decades. From his defense of General Manuel Antonio Noriega at trial, on appeal, at his successful resentencing, to his challenge to Florida’s election law during the contested election of George W. Bush in 2000; his representation of the ACLU in the battle over Rush Limbaugh’s medical records; and to his recent articles calling for revolutionary change in the way that criminal defense counsel prepare for trial and sentencing as well ways to prevent defendants from going to prison. As a federal criminal defense attorney Jon May has, and remains, at the cutting edge of criminal practice in the United States.

Columns by Jon May
Permalink to The Case for Televising Donald Trump’s TrialsThe Case for Televising Donald Trump’s Trials
The Case for Televising Donald Trump’s Trials

Criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Jon May discusses the rules regarding televising high-profile trials and calls for the trials of former President Donald Trump to be televised in the interest of transparency. Mr. May argues that courts have adequate procedural controls to ensure jurors and the judicial process are sufficiently protected and that televising the trials will allow anyone, anywhere in the country or the world, to see the truth for themselves.

Permalink to Neither Biden nor Trump Will Be Charged with any Unlawful Conduct Resulting from Their Possession of Classified Documents, but for Very Different ReasonsNeither Biden nor Trump Will Be Charged with any Unlawful Conduct Resulting from Their Possession of Classified Documents, but for Very Different Reasons
Neither Biden nor Trump Will Be Charged with any Unlawful Conduct Resulting from Their Possession of Classified Documents, but for Very Different Reasons

Criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Jon May describes the similarities and differences between the possession of classified documents by former President Trump and President Biden. Mr. May argues that neither is likely to lead to charges based on federal criminal statutes, but for vastly different reasons.

Permalink to Why the United States Faces an Uphill Battle Convicting Donald Trump for Unlawfully Removing Government Documents From the White House and Concealing Them at Mar-a-LagoWhy the United States Faces an Uphill Battle Convicting Donald Trump for Unlawfully Removing Government Documents From the White House and Concealing Them at Mar-a-Lago
Why the United States Faces an Uphill Battle Convicting Donald Trump for Unlawfully Removing Government Documents From the White House and Concealing Them at Mar-a-Lago

Attorney Jon May discusses what offenses former President Donald Trump is likely to be charged with, and why the government may fail to convict him for any of those offenses. Specifically, Mr. May addresses the issues with each of the three statutes listed on the search warrant authorizing the search of Mar-a-Lago.

Permalink to The United States v. Donald J. Trump: The Prosecution of a National Security CaseThe United States v. Donald J. Trump: The Prosecution of a National Security Case
The United States v. Donald J. Trump: The Prosecution of a National Security Case

Attorney Jon May predicts that within the next six months, former President Donald Trump will be indicted for violating the Espionage Act arising from his possession of classified documents after he left the White House. Mr. May describes some of the challenges that potentially classified evidence poses for both Trump’s defense and for the prosecution.

Permalink to Justice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just the End of Reproductive Rights, But the Downfall of Fundamental Civil Liberties Guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to All AmericansJustice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just the End of Reproductive Rights, But the Downfall of Fundamental Civil Liberties Guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to All Americans
Justice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just the End of Reproductive Rights, But the Downfall of Fundamental Civil Liberties Guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to All Americans

In this second of a series of columns on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., attorney Jon May argues that the decision threatens certain fundamental rights conferred by the Fourth Amendment. Mr. May predicts that those rights will not withstand the onslaught of law enforcement conduct in entering and searching our homes without a warrant, invading our private thoughts and associations found on our smart phones and computers, or stopping and searching us on the streets without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.

Permalink to Justice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just a Threat to Reproductive Rights, but to All Constitutional Liberties Not Expressly Set Out in the ConstitutionJustice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just a Threat to Reproductive Rights, but to All Constitutional Liberties Not Expressly Set Out in the Constitution
Justice Alito’s Opinion on Abortion: Not Just a Threat to Reproductive Rights, but to All Constitutional Liberties Not Expressly Set Out in the Constitution

Attorney Jon May argues that the reasoning of Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked majority draft of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. poses a threat not only to reproductive rights, but to all constitutional liberties not expressly enumerated in the Constitution. Mr. May points out that the radical departure of Justice Alito’s opinion could pave the way for the Court to overturn numerous rights recognized over the past seventy years deriving from the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments.