DOJ Justice Manual API: Over 1,500 Sections of Federal Prosecution Policy

Short answer: the DOJ Justice Manual is in the corpus as over 1,500 sections across 9 Titles, under corpusType=AGENCY_GUIDANCE with source=doj_justice_manual, cited the way DOJ cites it (Justice Manual 9-27.420). It is the Department's own internal policy, and the Department says plainly that it creates no rights and can't be relied on by a defendant. That combination is what makes it worth querying. It isn't law, and it is still the most reliable published statement of how a federal prosecutor is instructed to decide.

Reviewed and corrected on 12 October 2026. This is general information, not legal advice.

TL;DR

• Over 1,500 sections, 9 Titles, searchable as full text. Search for a citation such as Justice Manual 9-27.420 with the source filter and that section comes back first. Titles run from Organization and Functions through Criminal.
• It directs prosecutors, not courts. JM 1-1.200 says it "is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any matter, civil or criminal."
• It still controls internally. The same section says that where the Justice Manual conflicts with earlier DOJ statements of policy, the Justice Manual controls.
• Two antitrust neighbors ship with it: the 2023 DOJ and FTC Merger Guidelines (merger_guidelines, 1 document) and the DOJ Antitrust Division Leniency Policy (doj_leniency, 1 document).
• Documents and retrieval passages are different units. Across the whole corpus that is over 5 million distinct sections indexed as more than 20 million passages. One long policy document is one citable item split into many searchable chunks.
• Point in time is a reconstruction. A citation returns the text in force now. Add asOf=YYYY-MM-DD to the body endpoint and an earlier text is rebuilt from the change history we observed, with isBounded telling you when the answer rests on when capture began. You also get a yearFrom/yearTo filter and change events per refresh.

Part of our federal agency guidance series, which maps the sub-regulatory sources in the API.

For related coverage, see Federal Agency Guidance API: 53 Sub-Regulatory Sources in One Endpoint, Export Controls API: BIS Advisory Opinions and DDTC Commodity Jurisdiction Determinations for a regime DOJ charges under, and NLRB Memoranda API: General Counsel and Division of Advice Memos, Queryable for the same pattern in labor law.

What the Justice Manual is

The Justice Manual is the Department of Justice's published internal rulebook. JM 1-1.100 puts it in one line: the Manual "publicly sets forth internal Department of Justice (DOJ) policies and procedures."

It was previously the United States Attorneys' Manual and was revised and renamed in 2018 (see the history below). JM 1-1.200 says it is prepared under the supervision of the Attorney General and the direction of the Deputy Attorney General, and that the Deputy Attorney General has delegated authority to the Editor-in-Chief to authorize changes.

Nine Titles, each a different practice area.

Title 9 is where most investigations work lives. Verified chapters in Title 9 include 9-11.000 Grand Jury, 9-27.000 Principles of Federal Prosecution, 9-28.000 Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations, 9-44.000 Health Care Fraud, 9-47.000 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, 9-48.000 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the forfeiture chapters running from 9-111.000 through 9-121.000.

A short history: from a 1940 speech to a looseleaf

The reason the Manual exists is old. On April 1, 1940, three months into his time as Attorney General, Robert H. Jackson gave a speech to the country's U.S. Attorneys (the date and setting come from John Q. Barrett's note on The Jackson List). He said that the federal prosecutor "has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America." He also explained why Washington needed a hand in how they used it: "To promote uniformity of policy and action, to establish some standards of performance, and to make available specialized help, some degree of centralized administration was found necessary." Both lines are in the text of the speech published by the Robert H. Jackson Center. A written manual is that centralized administration in book form.

For decades it was the United States Attorneys' Manual. On September 25, 2018, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced the rollout of the renamed Justice Manual, per an NYU compliance and enforcement program write-up, which calls it the culmination of a year-long overhaul and the first in more than 20 years. The same piece says the most significant changes appear to be confined to codifications of well-publicized new policies, which is a common way for the Manual to grow: a memo or a speech first, a numbered section later.

The weight question, which is the interesting part

Here is the tension, stated by DOJ itself in two places.

JM 1-1.200: the Justice Manual "provides internal DOJ guidance. It is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any matter, civil or criminal."

JM 9-27.150, the Non-Litigability provision, goes further. The Principles of Federal Prosecution "are intended solely for the guidance of attorneys for the government," create no right or benefit enforceable at law, and "may not be relied upon by a party to litigation with the United States." The comment says the explicit statement exists to foreclose efforts to litigate the validity of prosecutorial actions alleged to be at variance with the principles, and that if someone tries, the government attorney "should oppose the attempt."

So you can't move to dismiss because a prosecutor departed from JM 9-28.300.

And yet the same document says something else. JM 1-1.200: "When the Justice Manual conflicts with earlier DOJ statements of policy or procedure, the Justice Manual controls."

A quick story: the policy you cannot sue over

In May 2022 DOJ updated the Manual's chapter on charging cases under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The section's closing paragraph carries an "[updated May 2022]" note. JM 9-48.000 tells prosecutors: "The attorney for the government should decline prosecution if available evidence shows the defendant's conduct consisted of, and the defendant intended, good-faith security research." Researchers cheered.

On Hacker News, a user asked the obvious question: is it a valid defense in court to say the prosecution should have ignored the conduct under its own policies? Another commenter answered flatly: "No. The Principles of Federal Prosecution (Title 9 of the Justice Manual) make very clear you can't litigate whether a prosecutor is following DOJ's internal policies" (nicknow, Hacker News, May 2022).

The chapter itself ends the same way. Its closing paragraph says the charging policy is "intended solely for the guidance of attorneys for the government" and "may not be relied upon to create a right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party to litigation with the United States."

So the policy matters a great deal and a court won't enforce it. Both are true, and a good defense lawyer uses it with the person who can actually act on it: the supervisor.

Both things are true at once, and that is why the Manual is worth having in a system.

A judge won't enforce it for your client. A supervising prosecutor will apply it to your client. JM 9-27.140 lets United States Attorneys modify or depart from the principles as necessary, and requires approval from the Deputy Attorney General (and from the appropriate Assistant Attorney General where required) for a modification adopted as a matter of policy or regular practice. That tells you the baseline exists and departures are a known event rather than the norm.

If you are preparing a Wells-style presentation or a declination pitch, the Manual is the scoring rubric. JM 9-28.300 sets out the factors to be considered in corporate prosecutions. JM 9-28.700 treats cooperation as a mitigating factor. JM 9-28.720 covers disclosing the relevant facts as the eligibility condition for cooperation credit. JM 9-28.800 covers compliance programs and 9-28.900 covers voluntary self-disclosures.

You aren't citing those to a court. You are citing them to the person who decides.

The Manual also shows its own scars. Its privilege section admits that "a wide range of commentators and members of the American legal community and criminal justice system have asserted" that DOJ's policies were used to coerce corporations into waiving privilege, and then directs that "prosecutors should not ask for such waivers and are directed not to do so" (JM 9-28.710). A policy document that records the complaint it was written to answer is a good reminder to check the revision note on any section you cite. They look like "[updated March 2023]" at the foot of a section.

Documents versus retrieval passages

This is the API detail that trips up developers reading the coverage numbers, and the two antitrust sources make it concrete.

The 2023 Merger Guidelines are one document, and so is the DOJ Antitrust Division Leniency Policy. Each is one citable item, split into several searchable chunks.

A "section" in this corpus is one citable item with a stable actId. A USC section, a CFR section, a Justice Manual section like 9-27.420. A "retrieval passage" is a chunk of that item, sized so hybrid search returns a relevant span instead of a 40 page PDF.

Long documents split into several passages. That is why the corpus totals are over 5 million distinct sections indexed as more than 20 million retrieval passages, roughly four passages per section on average.

The practical consequences:

• A count of 1 is not a coverage gap. merger_guidelines showing one document means the Merger Guidelines are a single document, not one of many.
• Search returns passages, retrieval returns the item. Get the actId from search, then call the section endpoint for the whole thing.
• Do not compute coverage from search result counts. Use GET /us/statutes/coverage, which is free (it needs an API key but costs no credits) and reports per jurisdiction counts by corpus, the corpus tokens, total sections and passages, and a measuredAt timestamp.

The two antitrust neighbors

The 2023 Merger Guidelines were jointly released by DOJ and the FTC on December 18, 2023, and DOJ's Antitrust Division describes them as "a non-binding statement that provides transparency on aspects of the deliberations the Agencies undertake in individual cases under the antitrust laws" (justice.gov, 2023 Merger Guidelines page, checked 12 October 2026).

Same shape as the Justice Manual. Not law, published anyway, and the closest thing to a written statement of how the reviewing agency will think.

The Antitrust Division Leniency Policy is the corporate self-disclosure track for cartel conduct. DOJ's Leniency Policy page states the policy is tailored to price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation crimes in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1, and that the Leniency Policy and Procedures are included in the Justice Manual's criminal antitrust enforcement chapter (March 2024 version, checked 12 October 2026).

That last part is a nice illustration of why both live in the same 53-source guidance corpus. The leniency policy is a standalone document and a Justice Manual chapter at the same time. Query them together.

Worked queries

Search costs 4 credits per call (confirmed on 12 October 2026 from the creditsConsumed field and the pricing endpoint). Base is https://api.vaquill.ai/api/v1, auth is Authorization: Bearer vq_key_.... The query examples below were run on that date.

Scope to the Justice Manual only:

curl -X POST https://api.vaquill.ai/api/v1/us/statutes/search \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer vq_key_..." \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "query": "factors weighed in charging a business organization",
    "corpusType": "AGENCY_GUIDANCE",
    "source": "doj_justice_manual",
    "limit": 20
  }'

Scope to one chapter or Title. Justice Manual citations carry the Title in the number itself, so a query can lead with the citation prefix plus your substantive terms. This one returned JM_S9-28.800 (Corporate Compliance Programs) when run. The browse hierarchy recipe covers walking a tree like this:

{
  "query": "9-28 corporate compliance program evaluation",
  "corpusType": "AGENCY_GUIDANCE",
  "source": "doj_justice_manual",
  "matchType": "all",
  "limit": 25
}

Query the three DOJ policy sources at once, which is what you want when the question is "how will DOJ think about a self-disclosure here":

{
  "query": "voluntary self-disclosure cooperation credit declination",
  "corpusType": "AGENCY_GUIDANCE",
  "source": ["doj_justice_manual", "doj_leniency", "merger_guidelines"],
  "matchType": "any",
  "limit": 50
}

Three behaviors worth knowing before you wire this into anything:

• Unknown filter values return 422, not silence. A typo in source (for example doj_justice_manuel) fails loudly, and the error message lists every valid code, so the API documents itself.
• Paging is cut from one ranking. Results never repeat or go missing between pages, and a later page costs no more than the first.
• Failed calls are not charged.

Who this is wrong for

If you want case law, this is the wrong corpus. The Justice Manual tells you what prosecutors are told to do, not what courts have held.

If you need a verified copy of JM 9-28.300 as it stood on a specific day in 2021, treat this corpus with care: asOf rebuilds an earlier text from the changes we observed, and for a date before capture began the answer is flagged isBounded or comes back unavailable. Check the publisher's own archive for anything you must prove.

If you just want to read one section once, justice.gov publishes the whole Manual for free and you should use it.

It earns its place when a system needs prosecution policy sitting next to statutes and regulations in one query surface with stable ids, so a compliance workflow or an internal research agent, following the compliance mapping recipe, can move from 18 U.S.C. to the charging policy to the Sentencing Guidelines that set the exposure without a person copying citations between four websites.

A free, machine-readable snapshot of US primary law, including agency guidance, is published at open-us-law.

FAQ

Is the DOJ Justice Manual binding law?

No. JM 1-1.200 states that the Manual provides internal DOJ guidance and isn't intended to, doesn't, and may not be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any party in any matter, civil or criminal. It is internal Department policy for DOJ attorneys, and it controls over earlier DOJ policy statements that conflict with it.

Can a defendant enforce the Justice Manual in court?

No. JM 9-27.150 says the Principles of Federal Prosecution are intended solely for the guidance of government attorneys and may not be relied upon by a party to litigation with the United States. The accompanying comment states that if a party tries to litigate a variance from the principles, the government attorney should oppose the attempt.

Why is the Justice Manual worth querying if it is not law?

Because it is what line prosecutors are instructed to follow. It is the most reliable published statement of how a charging, plea, or corporate resolution decision will actually be made, which is exactly what you want when the audience for your argument is a prosecutor rather than a judge.

How is the Justice Manual cited?

By Title and section number, for example Justice Manual 9-27.420 on the considerations weighed in a plea agreement. The first digit before the hyphen is the Title, so anything beginning 9- is in the Criminal Title. The corpus preserves that citation form, and searching the citation with the source filter returns the section first. Note that GET /us/statutes/resolve is built for statute and regulation citations and does not resolve Justice Manual citations (it returned resolved: false for Justice Manual 9-27.420 when we tried it on 12 October 2026), so use search for these.

How many sections and Titles does the Justice Manual have here?

Over 1,500 sections across 9 Titles, retrievable under corpusType=AGENCY_GUIDANCE with source=doj_justice_manual. Titles run from 1 (Organization and Functions) through 9 (Criminal).

What is the difference between a document and a retrieval passage?

A document, or section, is one citable item with a stable actId. A retrieval passage is a chunk of that item sized for semantic search. The 2023 Merger Guidelines are one document split into several passages, and across the whole corpus over 5 million sections are indexed as more than 20 million passages.

Are the 2023 Merger Guidelines binding?

No. DOJ's Antitrust Division describes them as a non-binding statement that provides transparency on aspects of the agencies' deliberations, and says the agencies continue to decide individual matters on the law and facts of each case. They were jointly released by DOJ and the FTC on December 18, 2023.

What does the DOJ Antitrust Division Leniency Policy cover?

Corporate and individual self-disclosure of cartel conduct. DOJ states the Corporate Leniency Policy is specifically tailored to price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation crimes in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1, and that its requirements and benefits differ from the other voluntary self-disclosure policies used elsewhere in the Department.

Can I get the Justice Manual as it read on a past date?

Partly. Pass asOf=YYYY-MM-DD to the section body endpoint and the earlier text is rebuilt from the before-side of the first change observed after your date. The response says which engine answered, and isBounded flags an answer that rests on when change capture began instead of on the law. Dated published editions are held for the CFR, the US Code and a few other sources, so the Justice Manual result is a reconstruction. Amendment history, a yearFrom/yearTo currency filter, change events from each refresh and per section diffs on watched boards sit alongside it. For a snapshot you may need to defend, store the text and actId you relied on at the time.

Where does this data come from?

justice.gov, the Department's own published copy. Section responses carry the justice.gov source URL, for example https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-48000-computer-fraud for 9-48.000.

Priyansh Khodiyar

Co-Founder & CTO

Priyansh leads engineering and AI at Vaquill AI: the pipelines that pull statutes, regulations and court rules from every US jurisdiction's official publisher, and the REST API, MCP server and open dataset that serve them.