U.S. v. ARCH TRADING CO. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A company was convicted for violating a presidential embargo on Iraq. The court affirmed, holding that violating a presidentially-issued, congressionally-authorized executive order constitutes a criminal “offense” for conspiracy purposes and that the underlying statute was constitutionally sound.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that violating an executive order, when authorized by a statute with criminal penalties like the IEEPA, constitutes an “offense” under the general conspiracy statute (18 U.S.C. § 371). It also affirms the constitutionality of the IEEPA against non-delegation and vagueness challenges.
U.S. v. ARCH TRADING CO. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
In November 1988, Arch Trading Co. contracted with an Iraqi state-owned company to supply and install laboratory equipment. After Iraq invaded Kuwait on August 2, 1990, President Bush, acting under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), issued Executive Order No. 12722, prohibiting U.S. persons from performing contracts in or traveling to Iraq. Arch Trading received a copy of the order that same day. Despite the prohibition, Arch Trading executives attempted to travel to Iraq and later hired a Jordanian firm to complete the installation, reimbursing its expenses. To recover a $200,000 performance deposit from a Kuwaiti bank, Arch Trading submitted backdated documents and falsely represented to the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) that it had completed performance and ceased all contact with Iraq before the embargo began. Arch Trading was subsequently indicted and convicted of conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371), violating the IEEPA, and making false statements to a federal agency (18 U.S.C. § 1001).
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a violation of a presidentially-issued executive order, authorized by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), constitute a conspiracy to commit an ‘offense’ against the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 371, and is the IEEPA an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to define crimes?
Yes. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that a violation of an Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non pr
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a violation of a presidentially-issued executive order, authorized by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), constitute a conspiracy to commit an ‘offense’ against the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 371, and is the IEEPA an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to define crimes?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the principle that violating presidentially-issued sanctions under the IEEPA Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco
Legal Rule
When Congress provides criminal sanctions for violations of executive orders that it Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Legal Analysis
The court first addressed the conspiracy conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 371. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A violation of an executive order is an “offense” under the