Washington, D.C, District of Columbia Dec 17, 2025 (Issuewire.com) - The federal government won't defend a conviction it spent four years prosecuting. On December 3, 2025, the Solicitor General waived the right to respond to a Supreme Court petition challenging a securities fraud conviction—the latest signal that the case against Joseph Cammarata cannot withstand scrutiny.
The problem: the conduct Cammarata was convicted of is legal. In Sprint Communications Co. v. APCC Services, Inc. (2008), the Supreme Court held that assigning legal claims is lawful. That's exactly what Cammarata did. No court has ever explained why Sprint doesn't apply.
A Pattern of Silence
The Solicitor General's waiver follows a pattern of government non-response:
An emergency mandamus petition in the Third Circuit has gone unopposed for eleven months. The government entered appearances in April 2025—then never filed a single brief.
A parallel SEC appeal has been pending for eighteen months without a government response.
Across three federal prosecutions, the government has never identified a single victim or proven a single dollar of loss.
Same Judges, Different Treatment
The Third Circuit judges who handled Cammarata's appeals—D. Brooks Smith and Luis Felipe Restrepo—are the same judges whose recent ruling disqualifying Acting U.S. Attorney Alina Habba made national headlines. In that case, the panel acted swiftly. In Cammarata's case, the same panel has refused to rule on an unopposed emergency petition for nearly a year.
What the Record Shows
More than 90 documented violations: Cammarata has charged and documented over 90 instances of constitutional violations and prosecutorial misconduct across three federal cases. The full record is publicly available.
The government held a TRO hearing in Philadelphia while Cammarata was in custody at a bail hearing in Miami—1,200 miles away.
The restraining order that froze $150 million in assets expired in November 2021. It has never been renewed. It is still being enforced.
Grand jury transcripts show federal agents misstated the law that controls the case.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest: The presiding judge's spouse practices in the same legal field at issue. The SEC prosecutor's wife is an attorney employed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals—a conflict Cammarata raised in filings. The government has never denied it. The Third Circuit has refused to compel a response for eighteen months. This is one of the reasons the Supreme Court's intervention is necessary.
In His Words
"The government took everything I had, put me in prison for four years, and now won't even defend the conviction," said Cammarata. "They froze $150 million so I couldn't hire a lawyer, then prosecuted me for conduct the Supreme Court said was legal. I've documented more than 90 constitutional violations. The Solicitor General's waiver tells you everything you need to know."
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court will decide whether to grant review. If it does, the case could set precedent on what happens when lower courts refuse to apply binding precedent—and when the government declines to defend its own prosecutions.
Supreme Court Docket: No. 25-6128
Third Circuit Mandamus: No. 25-1188
Full Documentation: ExposeJustice.com
Media Contact: contact@exposejustice.com
Media Contact
Expose Justice LLC contact@exposejustice.com 7868018982 1 Dutch Valley Road http://www.exposejustice.com
