Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 2084, 85 L.Ed.2d 434 (1985) (”[F]ar more than the simple omission of the appropriate phrase ... is necessary to justify dispensing with an intent requirement.” (quoting United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 438 U.S. 422, 438, 98 S.Ct. 2864, 57 L.Ed.2d 854 (1978)) (internal quotation mark omitted)); see also Carter v. United States, 530 191, 118 S.Ct. 1939, 141 L.Ed.2d 197 (1998) ("As a general matter, when used in the criminal context, a 'willful' act is one undertaken with a 'bad purpose.' In other words, in order to establish a 'willful' violation of a statute, the Government must prove that the defendant acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Ratzlaf v. United States, 510 U.S. 135, 137, 142 n. 10, 114 S.Ct. 655, 126 L.Ed.2d 615 (1994) (<HOLDING>); Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 202, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that to establish that a defendant willfully violated the antislructuring law the government must prove that the defendant acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful and stating that specific intent to commit the crimes  might be negated by eg proof that defendant relied in good faith on advice of counsel internal quotation marks omitted (B) holding that the challenged conduct or statement must be directed at the familial relationship with knowledge that the statements or conduct will adversely affect that relationship internal quotation marks omitted (C) holding that in a prosecution for willfully violating federal law against structuring financial transactions to evade bank reporting requirements the government must prove that the defendant acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful (D) holding that to violate a specific intent statute the defendant must act with the purpose of violating the law (E) holding that the defendant did not establish good faith as a matter of law
Output (English): holding that in a prosecution for willfully violating federal law against structuring financial transactions to evade bank reporting requirements the government must prove that the defendant acted with knowledge that his conduct was unlawful