In the 2000 case of Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. Don King et al., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of boxing promoter Cedric Kushner and against fellow promoter Don King and his corporation, DKP Corporation. The court held that an individual who acts as a corporate officer can be considered distinct from the corporation itself under RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act). This decision was based on allegations by Kushner that King had conducted fraudulent activities through his company to monopolize boxing promotions, which violated anti-racketeering laws. The ruling clarified that for purposes of RICO's "person" versus "enterprise" distinction, a corporate employee (in this case, Don King) is legally capable of being distinct from the corporation they serve or represent (DKP Corporation), thus allowing them to be separately liable for racketeering activities.

In the dissenting opinion for Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. Don King et al., Justice Scalia argued that the majority's interpretation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) was incorrect. He contended that a corporate employee cannot be distinct from his or her corporation for purposes of RICO liability because an individual cannot conduct or participate in conducting his own affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity. The statute’s language, he believed, does not allow such an interpretation as it clearly states that one must conduct "the affairs" not "one's own affairs." Therefore, according to Scalia’s view, since Don King acted on behalf of DKP rather than himself personally when allegedly committing fraud against Kushner Promotions Ltd., he could not be held liable under RICO.