In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.

In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.

August 18, 2026

In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.

By: Robert Ward

In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally. Any attorney who has litigated a case against a party proceeding pro se is familiar with the common refrain that courts liberally construe pro se filings.[1] This leniency was not enough for one Connecticut litigant. In a scheme that gives new meaning to the phrase “reading between the lines,” pro se plaintiff Matthew Elliot included hidden instructions in his filings with the goal of ensuring any AI model’s output would agree with his position. In doing so, Elliot undertook what appears to be the first confirmed prompt injection attack aimed at an American court. The Attempted Prompt Injection On July 24, 2026, pro se plaintiff Matthew Elliot filed what…

Read More about In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.

The DOJ Steps Up for Military Families

June 29, 2026

The DOJ Steps Up for Military Families

By: Lauren Scribner

The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), 50 U.S.C. § 4025a, grants military spouses portability of their professional licenses. That means when a military spouse moves with his or her servicemember to the servicemember’s assigned duty station in a new state, the spouse’s professional license essentially moves with them.[1] In order to take advantage of this license portability benefit in the new state, the SCRA requires…

Read More about The DOJ Steps Up for Military Families

How Much is Too Much? – Second Circuit Establishes Guardrails for Sentencing Hearings

June 22, 2026

How Much is Too Much? – Second Circuit Establishes Guardrails for Sentencing Hearings

By: James Trusty

As any federal criminal practitioner can attest, judges holding a sentencing hearing are privy to an intentionally wider universe of information about the defendant than a jury would have heard about at trial. We want judges to consider all sorts of things about the offender and the offense, beyond just the facts establishing the crime – social background, employment history, criminal record, substance abuse history, mental health issues, and more. Particularly in…

Read More about How Much is Too Much? – Second Circuit Establishes Guardrails for Sentencing Hearings

How White Hats Get Dirty

March 19, 2020

How White Hats Get Dirty

By: James Trusty

Historically, undercover operations by law enforcement would run into problematic “loyalty tests,” designed to make sure that the criminal conspirators could trust the “new guy.” Biker gangs would ask this “pledge” to beat someone up or take drugs, knowing law enforcement agencies would likely not let that happen, even in an undercover capacity. Prostitution stings could be compromised by either a John smart enough to…

Read More about How White Hats Get Dirty

A Tiny Crack in the Wall?

December 10, 2019

A Tiny Crack in the Wall?

By: James Trusty

Federal sentencing proceedings have a long and rich history of including every speck of good and bad that a defendant brings to the table. Unlike the trial itself, there are no Rules of Evidence that apply to keep the factfinder from considering unreliable or unproven information. The judge need only find facts by a preponderance of evidence, and those facts can be established by hearsay….

Read More about A Tiny Crack in the Wall?

Celebrating 10 Years by Strategizing with the Best

August 6, 2019

Celebrating 10 Years by Strategizing with the Best

By: Nicole Kardell

How do you celebrate ten years of defending people against a criminal justice system that plays with a stacked deck? Bring in a renowned journalist and legal commentator to talk problems and solutions. Emily Bazelon, a staff writer at New York Times Magazine and the Truman Capote Fellow for Creative Writing and Law at Yale Law School, kicked off Ifrah Law’s Ten-Year Anniversary with an…

Read More about Celebrating 10 Years by Strategizing with the Best

When a Guilty Plea is a Bad Gamble: SCOTUS Weighs in on Double Jeopardy and the Dual Sovereignty Rule

June 19, 2019

When a Guilty Plea is a Bad Gamble: SCOTUS Weighs in on Double Jeopardy and the Dual Sovereignty Rule

By: James Trusty

On Monday, the Supreme Court handed down Gamble v. United States, No. 17-646, an interesting decision on Double Jeopardy with practical and predictive ramifications beyond its limited facts. Terance Martez Gamble was caught possessing a loaded handgun in Mobile, Alabama, after previously having been convicted for robbery. He pleaded guilty and received one year in jail. Federal prosecutors then indicted him for felon-in-possession, based upon…

Read More about When a Guilty Plea is a Bad Gamble: SCOTUS Weighs in on Double Jeopardy and the Dual Sovereignty Rule

Tyson KO’s Indiana: How a Self-Described Junkie Found Nine New Friends in the Supreme Court

February 20, 2019

Tyson KO’s Indiana: How a Self-Described Junkie Found Nine New Friends in the Supreme Court

By: James Trusty

There’s a saying that many prosecutors know as an exhortation to “take the long view” and to use discretion even where the law seems to permit an aggressive approach—it’s that “bad facts make bad law.” In the case of Indiana prosecutors seeking to cash in on a car seizure from a low-level drug dealer, their failure to back-down from a harsh forfeiture unified the Supreme…

Read More about Tyson KO’s Indiana: How a Self-Described Junkie Found Nine New Friends in the Supreme Court

Articles and Presentations by Our Firm Attorneys

In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.

In the age of AI, litigators must read between the lines—literally.
By: Robert Ward

The DOJ Steps Up for Military Families

The DOJ Steps Up for Military Families
By: Lauren Scribner

How Much is Too Much? – Second Circuit Establishes Guardrails for Sentencing Hearings

How Much is Too Much? – Second Circuit Establishes Guardrails for Sentencing Hearings
By: James Trusty

Subscribe to Ifrah Law’s Insights