DOJ Leaders Face Bipartisan Calls to Get Tougher on Executives

Two senior Justice Department officials defended their corporate crime enforcement progress Tuesday from senators in both parties insisting on tougher prosecution of executives and greater transparency into those efforts.

During a hearing to examine the department’s white-collar initiatives, Senate Judiciary Committee members pressed the heads of the national security and criminal divisions for details on why more executives aren’t imprisoned for corporate wrongdoing.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), citing 2022 Sentencing Commission figures, asked why DOJ only prosecutes individuals in 60% of the cases it brings against companies.

“We do try to do the most impactful cases, which can be complex, they can be time consuming,” said Nicole Argentieri, the acting assistant attorney general of the criminal division. “But we think that we have shown significant results.”

“This year alone we have charged over 30 corporate executives, including the CEO of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange who pled guilty last month,” Argentieri added.

The panel was scrutinizing executive accountability after DOJ’s landmark $4.3 billion resolution with Binance Holdings Ltd., which included guilty pleas by the company and its CEO for violating anti-money laundering and sanctions laws. Changpeng Zhao was required to step down as CEO of Binance, and faces up to 18 months of prison under US sentencing guidelines.

But Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who chairs the committee, expressed frustration that the department in many other corporate cases reaches deferred or non-prosecution agreements, or other settlements in which executives escape prison.

He questioned Argentieri about DOJ’s 2020 resolution with opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma. “Why was no criminal action brought against the Sacklers?” Durbin asked, referring to the family that owns the company.

She pointed to Purdue Pharma’s guilty plea on three felony counts and its remediation and financial penalties. But she ultimately noted the charging decisions were made by a different office.

Durbin replied, ”The message is basically, when you’ve got enough money you can game the system.”

The hearing occurred a day after Durbin and other Democrats in both chambers reintroduced legislation that would require DOJ to provide more comprehensive public data on its corporate crime cases. A representative for the department didn’t immediately comment on whether DOJ endorses the bill.

Although Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco suggested earlier in the administration that DOJ would be taking a closer look at the appropriateness of DPAs and NPAs to resolve corporate matters, Argentieri defended their use Tuesday from a Democratic senator’s criticism.

“With more resources, we could do more,” she said. “But I also think that, deferred prosecution agreements, nonprosecution agreements—those are really serious agreements that are highly negotiated, and they require forward looking change by a company. So they’re not a pass.”

Matthew Olsen, who leads DOJ’s national security division, testified about the department’s increased emphasis on prosecuting white collar cases that intersect with threats from nation states like Russia and China.

Olsen said, “There are just obstacles to being able to investigate and prosecute entities overseas.” He then added, “We are really aggressive in going after them,” including “if they touch the US financial system.”