Skip to main content

Scaled-back Alibaba settlement reflects DOJ’s approach to food and drug cases

▶ Watch Video: Alibaba sold dangerous drugs to Americans but avoided DOJ prosecution, public records show

For eight years, Chinese online retailer Alibaba and its U.S. payment processing company failed to prevent dangerous drugs, chemicals and pill presses from being sold to American customers — even after employees warned of compliance problems, public records show.

Prosecutors at the Justice Department believed they had enough evidence to prove that the companies had committed felony violations of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, multiple sources with knowledge of the matter told CBS News. 

That law, first enacted in 1938, prohibits the sale, distribution or manufacturing of counterfeit, adulterated or misbranded drugs and medical devices, as well as food, supplements and cosmetics. 

The case, which started during President Trump’s first administration, took several years and involved investigators from multiple agencies. The evidence only became stronger during the Biden administration, after a senior official in then-Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco’s office urged staff to keep digging, rather than settle it for less, several people familiar with the details of the case told CBS News.

As the case moved toward a resolution in recent months, career prosecutors urged Justice Department leadership to enter into a deferred prosecution agreement with Alibaba and AUS Merchant Services Inc., in which they would admit to the felony offenses, one of the sources said.

Instead, the case was recently resolved for $600 million in penalties and forfeitures and a non-prosecution agreement in which the company only admitted to committing lesser misdemeanor violations. 

While the Justice Department hailed it as a victory, one of the people familiar with the strength of the evidence called the resolution “beyond disappointing.”

“There was egregious conduct by a Chinese-owned company. An NPA is not even a slap on the wrist,” the person added, speaking anonymously in order to discuss non-public discussions about the case.

Lawyers for Alibaba and AUS Merchant Services did not respond to requests for comment.

The decision to seek a lighter settlement with Alibaba marks the latest in a string of corporate cases involving public health and safety under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act that have been softened, dismissed or lost support from senior Justice Department leaders in recent months, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

In those cases, Justice Department leadership dropped its support or closed criminal investigations even when investigators believed there was evidence that consumers faced significant risk of harm from defective or adulterated products, multiple sources told CBS News.

“President Trump always talks of being tough on crime, but his administration guts enforcement for corporate law-breakers,” said Lisa Gilbert, the co-president of Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group. 

“In this context, where Americans’ health and safety and well-being is on the line, it has real-life ramifications to withhold accountability for corporate wrongdoing.”

The Justice Department, in response to questions from CBS News, disputed the notion that it is going soft on criminal corporate prosecutions against companies over health and safety violations.

“Ensuring the safety of our nation’s food supply is a top priority for the Trump administration. However, this Department of Justice does not believe in regulation by prosecution,” a department spokesperson said.

“When righting wrongs, both civil and criminal options are on the table, and our prosecutors will always work within the bounds of our enforcement priorities to hold bad actors accountable to the fullest extent possible,” the spokesperson added.

Investigating defective CPAP machines and contamination at baby formula plant

Since 2022, federal prosecutors in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., have been jointly investigating a unit of Philips, after it was forced to recall millions of CPAP, BiPAP, and mechanical ventilators over a sound-reducing foam inside the machines that can degrade, which meant people using the devices could inhale cancer-causing chemicals, according to corporate filings and sources familiar with the matter.

The case garnered widespread attention, impacting some 15 million devices. 

The company has already agreed to pay out more than $1 billion to settle numerous personal injury claims, and in 2024, the Justice Department secured a civil consent decree which required Philips Respironics to hire outside experts to inspect its facilities, correct any deficiencies and ensure that problems with the breathing machines were remediated.

Earlier this spring, federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania learned that their consumer protection counterparts in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division were no longer permitted to jointly work on the Philips case with them, sources with direct knowledge told CBS News.

The decision by DOJ officials in Washington to drop the department’s support for the Philips investigation was triggered by a broader order directing consumer protection prosecutors in Washington, D.C., to pull back on Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act investigations for all but the most serious cases, the sources added.

A company spokesperson told CBS News that five independent laboratories have since confirmed that the use of its sleep therapy devices is not likely to result in appreciable harm for patients.

Another case in the Philadelphia-based U.S. attorney’s office that is no longer being supported by senior Justice Department leadership relates to the unlawful importation of adulterated vape products by wholesale companies, the sources added.

The prosecutors in Washington, D.C., who have traditionally worked on criminal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act cases previously served in the Consumer Protection Branch — a unit that handled both criminal and civil enforcement of U.S. food and drug safety laws and often partnered with U.S. attorneys’ offices throughout the country.

Last year, as part of a sweeping reorganization, the unit was disbanded, with its attorneys who handled civil cases remaining in the Civil Division and its prosecutors shuffled to a new office in the Criminal Division called the Health and Safety Unit.

In a recent meeting with those health and safety prosecutors, Tysen Duva, the assistant attorney general of the Criminal Division, imposed a new litmus test, telling them they should only bring cases that would stir outrage in their neighbors and that could be quickly explained in two minutes, sources familiar with the meeting told CBS News.

But even that litmus test apparently does not apply in every case.

Earlier this year, the Justice Department ordered prosecutors in Washington and Michigan to shut down a long-running criminal investigation into Abbott Laboratories over Cronobacter bacterial contamination at one of its plants in Michigan that manufactures powdered baby formula, several sources familiar with the matter said.

The incident garnered attention in 2022 when Abbott Laboratories recalled several of its popular powdered formula brands, including Similac, after consumers complained about infant illness related to products from Abbott Nutrition, in Sturgis, Michigan. The FDA in March of that year said five infants had to be hospitalized due to reported bacterial infections which it said “may have contributed to death in two patients.”

A company spokesman said that no link between its manufacturing plant and the clinical cases that sparked the recall was ever found.

The closure of the criminal case, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, came about even after Duva and other leaders of the Criminal Division expressed support for keeping the case alive, those sources familiar with the matter told CBS News. The Criminal Division was overruled. 

Bloomberg Government previously reported on the disagreement between Duva and other senior DOJ leaders, saying the case has since raised wider concerns about scaling back on corporate prosecutions involving public health and safety.

A May 12 court entry for a parallel civil False Claims Act case involving the formula incident shows the Justice Department has reached a settlement with Abbott, but details have not yet been revealed. 

In a February court filing in the case, DOJ lawyers accused the company of lying to federal and state regulatory agencies about its compliance with the law.

Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California, in a letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, is launching an inquiry into why the Abbott case was shuttered.

“If prosecuting cases involving the risk of injuries or death to premature infants are not a priority enforcement matter, I have questions about what priorities the DOJ considers worthy of pursuing,” Schiff wrote.

A senior DOJ official told CBS that the department felt that a civil False Claims Act resolution was “the best mechanism to achieve accountability, deterrence and protection of the public” in the matter. 

The official added that the agreement reached in principle with Abbott includes a “significant” monetary penalty, and said that Abbott’s potential plans to build a new $1 billion facility in Ohio played no role in its decision to drop the criminal investigation.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Abbott told CBS News that “no unopened, distributed Abbott infant formulas have ever tested positive for Cronobacter sakazakii” and said the Food and Drug Administration also separately confirmed in March 2022 that “the unopened product from homes of the infants under investigation at the time of the 2022 recall tested negative for Cronobacter.”

Shifting away from corporate prosecutions

The retreat on criminal enforcement of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by corporate bad actors represents part of a broader trend by the Justice Department to scale back on corporate prosecutions in general.

Since last year, enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases targeting companies for bribery has slowed at President Trump’s request, and some high-profile cases have been shuttered, such as the ones targeting Cognizant and Indian billionaire Gautam S. Adani.

In a May 2025 memo, prosecutors were told to prioritize particular types of white-collar cases, such as government benefit fraud, or matters involving cartels, Chinese money laundering and other national security concerns. At the same time, it also signaled the department would be pulling back on some areas, such as the use of corporate monitors. “Not all corporate misconduct warrants federal criminal prosecution,” the memo said. 

Earlier this year, the DOJ also rolled out a new corporate enforcement policy for an array of criminal cases that allow companies to avoid being prosecuted if they take certain steps, such as voluntarily disclosing misconduct to the department and cooperating with investigators.

Duva, in a statement provided to CBS News, said the new corporate enforcement policy “gives companies clear, transparent, and predictable standards concerning how and when to disclose wrongdoing to the Department.”

“Companies that voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, fully cooperate with law enforcement, and remediate have a path to a declination, while those that don’t face more punitive resolutions. All corporate cases that the Department resolved this year were done so in a public fashion and were driven by the facts, the evidence, and the law — not a preference for any particular outcome,” he added.

However, the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act may be uniquely vulnerable in the Trump Justice Department, compared to other types of corporate prosecutions.

Unlike most criminal laws, it contains a strict liability provision that allows prosecutors to charge corporations or individuals with misdemeanor violations without having to show they intentionally broke the law.

The strict liability provisions of the law have long been controversial, and they are primarily used as a lever in negotiations involving more serious criminal misconduct, rather than as a charging tool against corporate bad actors, current and former prosecutors say.

Still, last year the White House issued an executive order discouraging the use of criminal prosecutions to address regulatory concerns. The order explicitly stated that strict liability offenses are “generally disfavored.”

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who is scheduled to appear for his Senate confirmation hearing on July 15 for his nomination to serve as attorney general permanently, is expected to field some questions from Democrats who are concerned about the Justice Department’s decision to shutter the Abbott case.

It remains to be seen, meanwhile, what the fate of the Philips investigation will be.

David Metcalf, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, privately vowed to keep the probe alive despite the lack of support from Washington, according to sources with knowledge of the matter.

The company, for its part, has continued to engage with federal prosecutors on the case, as well as state attorneys general who are also investigating, according to a Philips spokesman.

But career DOJ staff members now fear that this case too will be closed, or settled in a lenient fashion, one source familiar with their thinking said.

Trump apunta a un gran lago y a un gran estadounidense en su más reciente búsqueda de poder

¡Toma eso, Canadá y Camelot!El presidente de EE.UU., conocido por su política de mano dura, planea arrasar el Centro Kennedy y cambiar el nombre del lago Ontario si se ve frustrado en uno de sus principales proyectos de legado y en su última guerra comercial.Las dos amenazas del martes parecieron absurdas. Pero resumen a la perfección un principio fundamental del segundo mandato de Trump: la creencia de que nada puede interponerse en su camino.Y cuando la realidad no le satisface, inventa la suya propia.Estos dos episodios también plantean la evidente cuestión de por qué Trump se obsesiona con esas nimiedades mientras su guerra en Irán continúa y los estadounidenses se desesperan ante los altos precios de los alimentos, el combustible y la vivienda antes de las elecciones de mitad de mandato.¿Es esto realmente por lo que votó el país en 2024?Pero el troleo es la versión más auténtica de Trump. Demuestra cómo utiliza la política del espectáculo para indignar a las élites, desconcertar a las instituciones y desatar tormentas mediáticas. Todo ello para pulir su imagen de forastero y unir a su coalición populista.Prácticamente no hay institución que no intente desestabilizar, o destruir si se resiste a su poder. Ningún edificio, monumento natural ni artefacto histórico está a salvo de la mirada de este maestro del marketing.Le importan un bledo los tribunales, la Constitución y los aliados de Estados Unidos. Trump busca dejar su huella en el paisaje y en el mapa para asegurarse de que el mundo lo recuerde.Pero si bien el presidente ve oportunidades para ejercer un poder sin rendir cuentas, sus reacciones extremas del martes también insinúan una creciente impotencia.Su equipo legal amenaza con demoler el Centro Kennedy solo porque los tribunales han frustrado sus planes de renovarlo y, quizás no por casualidad, de poner su nombre en la fachada.Puede que esté bromeando sobre cambiar el nombre del vasto cuerpo de agua que separa el estado de Nueva York de Ontario a Lago América. Pero su alarde oculta un posible fracaso: los canadienses le niegan una victoria en su última guerra comercial.Darle a un lago un nombre que la mayoría de la gente no usaría parece un pobre sustituto de añadir a Canadá como su ansiado estado número 51.La última amenaza de Trump contra el Kennedy Center surgió en documentos legales relacionados con un intento judicial de frustrar su intento de hacerse con el control. Su equipo advierte que, si no se realizan las renovaciones, el centro podría tener que ser reemplazado por un anfiteatro al aire libre.De inmediato, Trump está recurriendo a una táctica conocida: adoptar un argumento legal aparentemente descabellado para manipular el proceso judicial.Los jueces ya han dictaminado que el presidente carece de autoridad para cambiar el nombre del edificio o autorizar obras estructurales importantes. Ese poder reside en el Congreso, no en los fideicomisarios designados por el presidente que él mismo ha designado para respaldar su intento de adquisición.Pero esta saga también destaca por la total indiferencia de Trump hacia las implicaciones de tomar el control de un monumento viviente a un presidente asesinado que evitó una guerra nuclear durante la Crisis de los Misiles de Cuba.Quizás desee insultar a una gran dinastía estadounidense y demócrata que aún goza del reconocimiento histórico que él parece anhelar, pero que hasta ahora se le resiste.Es difícil negar que, a pesar de la astucia de Trump en el mundo del espectáculo, su interés por el Kennedy Center ha sido desastroso.La Ópera Nacional de Washington y la Orquesta Sinfónica Nacional abandonaron su sede.El Washington Post informó el martes que la venta de entradas y las donaciones se desplomaron después de que la junta directiva de Trump votara a favor de poner su nombre en el edificio.Es esperpéntica la escena de una lona que cubre la fachada de la institución después de que un tribunal ordenara al presidente borrar su nombre que figuraba junto al del presidente número 35.Es probable que los críticos vean la nueva amenaza de destruir el centro por completo como otro acto de venganza, o un intento de encubrir otro proyecto vergonzoso de Trump, junto con la fallida renovación del Estanque Reflectante de Washington.Sin embargo, Trump insiste en que está embelleciendo una capital que se ha dejado deteriorar en los últimos tiempos. Y es cierto que la limpieza de fuentes, parques, estatuas y algunos edificios públicos ha supuesto, en muchos casos, una mejora estética.Mientras tanto, otro enfrentamiento legal amenaza con paralizar la construcción del salón de baile que reemplazará al Ala Este de la Casa Blanca, la cual demolió en otra maniobra de poder legalmente cuestionable.Además, su imponente arco, que ensombrecería las vistas panorámicas de la capital, es visto por muchos como un futuro monumento a la arrogancia presidencial.Pero Trump podría sacar provecho político del embrollo del Kennedy Center, incluso si pierde la batalla legal. Expulsar al poder fáctico de la capital de su palacio de las artes difícilmente perjudicará su imagen populista.La amenaza del presidente en las redes sociales de cambiar el nombre del lago Ontario fue un gesto de burla y desprecio hacia un vecino leal que lleva mucho tiempo enviando a sus hijos a morir en las guerras de Estados Unidos, sacrificios que Trump ignora.Canadá prometió el martes responder a sus amenazas arancelarias dólar por dólar, tras acusarlo de infringir su soberanía con exigencias incluidas en las propuestas de acuerdos comerciales.El hecho de que publicara un mapa que mostraba el nuevo y potencial “Lago América” ​​parece un gesto infantil, pero también fue una reveladora muestra de su metodología política.A Trump le encanta provocar. Sus publicaciones más virales suelen generar indignación en la clase política, entre sus adversarios y en los medios tradicionales. Esto le sirve para complacer a sus seguidores y a los medios de derecha.La propuesta de Trump de “Hacer que uno de los Grandes Lagos vuelva a ser grande” ni siquiera es una novedad. Refleja su decisión de cambiar el nombre del Golfo de México a Golfo de América, anunciada durante su discurso inaugural el año pasado.Cuando lo hizo, Hillary Clinton, su oponente derrotada en 2016, no pudo contener la risa. Para los anti-Trump, fue un momento de burla. Pero el episodio resultó ser un atisbo de un presidente entrante con la costumbre de modificar los mapas para satisfacer sus caprichos monárquicos.Hace unas semanas, Trump especuló con la posibilidad de declarar territorio estadounidense el estrecho de Ormuz, bajo el férreo control iraní.Un presidente no puede simplemente declarar parte de Estados Unidos una vía marítima extranjera que no controla. Pero la provocación divirtió a los comentaristas conservadores y, por un breve tiempo, desvió la atención de su fracaso en poner fin a una guerra que, según Trump, había ganado tras unos pocos días el invierno pasado.Todos los presidentes utilizan el derecho a nombrar lugares como herramienta de poder político, para reflejar su ideología y para intentar definir su época.Pero Trump lo lleva a otro nivel, algo muy apropiado para un experto en marketing que hizo su fortuna poniendo su nombre en hoteles y campos de golf, filetes y zapatillas deportivas.Su administración ha cambiado el nombre de bases militares, buques de guerra y picos de montañas para impulsar lo que considera su cruzada contra la ideología “woke”.Por ejemplo, recuperó el antiguo nombre del Monte McKinley en Alaska, que había sido rebautizado como Denali por el presidente Barack Obama, en honor a su nombre histórico de origen nativo americano.Y CNN informó la semana pasada que el Pentágono, bajo su nuevo nombre, el Departamento de Guerra, está considerando cambiar el nombre de un portaaviones en construcción, posiblemente en honor a Trump.Originalmente, estaba previsto que rindiera homenaje a Doris “Dorie” Miller, héroe negro de Pearl Harbor.En su provocación en línea sobre el lago Ontario, el presidente dijo que no había necesidad de mencionar la provincia porque el comercio bilateral con Estados Unidos pronto se agotaría.Pero claro, el principal provocador también puede ser objeto de provocaciones.“Llamémoslo simplemente Lago Natalie para que sepamos que empezarán a proteger nuestros Grandes Lagos”, escribió la representante demócrata Debbie Dingell de Michigan en X, en una referencia irónica a la asistente ejecutiva de la Casa Blanca, Natalie Harp, la omnipresente ayudante del presidente.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story