Open Access Publisher and Free Library
CRIMINAL JUSTICE.jpeg

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE-CRIMINAL LAW-PROCDEDURE-SENTENCING-COURTS

Posts in Federal
The Scam Economy: The True Cost of Online Scams and Crimes in America

By  Consumer Federation of America

Federal agencies, third parties, and other groups report on scam losses each year, but these numbers are only the tip of the iceberg in measuring the size and devastation experienced by those who are targeted. Behind these reports and big spreadsheets describing reported losses are shattered families, rent money lost, and grandmothers exploited. Newer technology is leading to a rise in these scams – in both severity and number: AI is supercharging these scams, social media platforms are enabling the spread, and data brokers facilitate targeting of victims, allowing criminals to reach consumers at massive scales while exploiting highly precise profiling to victimize vulnerable people. One of the biggest problems in fully understanding the scope of these scams is underreporting. Due to reporting fragmentation and communication, as well as the understandable devastation, embarrassment, and confusion that victims often feel, estimates on how many people report their losses to scams put it extremely low – often in the single digit percent of the actual number, according to conservative key government estimations. CFA is proud to publish this report that takes the most conservative estimate of underreporting and uses it to estimate The True Cost of Scams. While this issue is complicated to solve completely, there are significant unrealized opportunities for legislators, enforcement agencies, and industry to step up to address it.

Washington, DC: Consumer Federation of America, 2026, 31p.

A WORLD OF DECEIT MAPPING:  THE LANDSCAPE OF THE GLOBAL SCAM CENTRE PHENOMENON

By Kristina Amerhauser | Alex Goodwin

Scams and fraud have undergone a profound evolution in recent decades, becoming one of the most sophisticated, pervasive and lucrative forms of organized crime globally. According to the Global Anti-Scam Alliance, 57% of adults worldwide reported experiencing a scam in the previous 12 months. Estimates suggest that more than US$1 trillion was generated from scams and fraud in 2024 alone


Rather than focusing on individual scam typologies – such as romance, investment or impersonation scams – this report examines the scam centre as a distinct organizational unit, mapping the various forms they take, the different economic models they use, and the broader ecosystem that allows them to operate and expand. 

Around the world, these hubs of scams appear in different shapes and sizes. Some are located in apartments, hotels or villas, which offer discretion and the ability to relocate quickly – and sometimes in-built security. Many rent office space, sometimes with legal call centres as neighbours, providing camouflage for criminal activities. At the largest scale, cyber scam compounds in South East Asia host extensive workforces and structured operations with management, financial services and technical infrastructure. In some contexts, they also operate from prisons or pre-trial detention centres, where a captive workforce and collusion with officials can facilitate criminal activity. 

This new research report finds that whatever form they take, size does not always correlate to impact. Small operations can also be highly effective, and may sometimes be linked to an overarching scam network, essentially making them nodes in a dispersed scam centre. 

Despite their varied physical footprints, scam centres are enabled by six common ‘glocal’ force multipliers that allow them to operate, scale and target victims worldwide: networked groups; technology and crime-as-a-service; money; political protection; people; and geopolitics. 

Technology is a critical driver of the scam economy. It enables scammers to reach victims around the world at minimal cost and provides tools to circumvent cyber defences. Some of the tools used include deepfakes, cloned applications, fake investment platforms and instant translation, as well as the use of data that enables precise social targeting of victims. 

Illicit financial flows generated through scams are handled through a combination of money mules, cryptocurrencies, fintech tools and physical assets. These mechanisms often operate simultaneously, making it difficult and time-sensitive for law enforcement to trace illicit proceeds. 

The report also highlights the central role of people in scam centre operations. Workers may be recruited locally with promises of lucrative salaries or trafficked from abroad and forced to work in exploitative conditions. In South East Asia alone, an estimated 300 000 people have been trafficked into scam compounds. 

Looking ahead, the research identifies three major risks: displacement, diffusion and de-globalization. These dynamics may lead scam centres to become more embedded in more places, especially in areas where governance is weak. Some countries may also become linked to the scam economy not by hosting scam centres themselves but by facilitating money laundering or enabling services. 

The report concludes that tackling scam centres requires addressing the interconnected nature of their operations. Single-strand approaches may disrupt individual operations, but they will not meaningfully affect the broader environment in which scam centres thrive. 

Geneva: Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime., 

, 2026. 52p.

Financial Fraud and Scams: The Roles of Federal Law Enforcement and Financial Regulators

By the Federal Trade Commission

Reported losses associated with financial fraud and scams have been increasing, garnering attention from law enforcement, private industry, policymakers, and the general public. In 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) received 2.6 million reports of fraud and scams, including $12.5 billion in reported losses. Similarly, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) received 859,532 complaints in 2024, including $16.6 billion in reported losses (of which $13.7 billion were attributed to cyber-enabled fraud). These frauds and scams can deprive victims of their savings, deteriorate their overall financial health, and undermine public confidence in the financial system. A range of federal entities have roles in countering scams; this In Focus highlights the roles of federal law enforcement, financial regulators, and the FTC.

Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission, 2026. 3p.

Over-Federalization: Federal Intrusion Into State Criminal Law 

By Liz Komar

A broad and growing number of crimes are criminalized at both the state and federal levels. This means that either state or federal authorities, or both, can prosecute these offenses. Long-standing political pressure for federal lawmakers to demonstrate their responsiveness to constituent concerns about crime,1 even if the crimes in question are already subject to local prosecution, has led to a federeral criminal code that encompasses a wide array of local conduct. That broad reach comes at a significant cost

Artificial Intelligence in the Criminal Justice System.  Demystifying artificial intelligence, its applications, and potential risks 

By James Redden; Molly O'Donovan Dix

This technology brief is the first in a four-part series that explores artificial intelligence (AI) applications within the criminal justice system. This first brief frames AI, defines common AI terms, and offers a mental model for identifying AI use cases within the criminal justice system. While this brief provides examples of how AI might bring significant benefit to the criminal justice system, it also highlights risks that decision makers should consider when developing or deploying AI tools. Additional briefs provide greater consideration of AI in law enforcement, the criminal courts system, and corrections.   

  Key Takeaways ¡ AI will transform our personal, industrial, commercial, and civil realities in the years to come— enabling and challenging individuals involved in the justice system as well as in criminal activity. ¡ AI tools have the potential to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and expand capabilities across many criminal justice use cases; however, technical feasibility and operational realities need to be considered. ¡ AI systems carry inherent risk that decision makers need to understand. For example, AI technologies raise ethical and civil liberties questions that the criminal justice system and society at large will have to wrestle with in the years ahead. AI will bring changes to nearly every industry over the next decade. In fact, AI is already impacting our daily lives and is being built into the background of many of our daily activities—from facial recognition technologies that unlock our smartphones, to algorithms that recommend movies we might like, to virtual chatbots that handle our customer service inquiries. Forthe criminal justice system, AI presents opportunities along with significant risks. AI tools have the potential to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and expand capabilities across many criminal justice use cases. Yet many criminal justice leaders have misconceptions about the capabilities and the level of investment required to create or deploy AI solutions for specific use cases

Research Triangle Park, NC:RTI International.,   . 

2020. 10p.

Change to Federal Definition of Hemp and Implications for Federal Enforcement

By Lisa N. Sacco, Zachary T. Neuhofer, Hassan Z. Sheikh

Change to Federal Definition of Hemp and Implications for Federal Enforcement

December 3, 2025 (IN12620)

On November 12, 2025, Congress and President Trump enacted a full-year FY2026 Agriculture appropriations act (P.L. 119-37, Division B), which contained a provision that reimposes federal controls over certain hemp products.

Both marijuana and hemp are varieties of the cannabis plant, and until 2018, hemp was considered to be marijuana as defined under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). From 1970 until 2018, the federal government's definition of marijuana included hemp and its derivatives, and widespread hemp production was generally prohibited. Under the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 farm bill; P.L. 115-334), Congress amended the CSA definition of marijuana to reflect the differences in the chemical and psychoactive properties between hemp and marijuana, but it referred only to the level of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to distinguish between them and not the other cannabinoids found within the cannabis plant. Some interpreted this definition of marijuana and the new federal definition of hemp to mean that products containing less than 0.3% delta-9 THC in addition to other psychoactive compounds would not be considered marijuana and would legally be considered hemp—the so-called farm bill loophole

Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2025. 3p.