As the Supreme Court’s recent term drew to a close, the Court issued four opinions that promise to reshape the federal regulatory landscape. These decisions—Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Ohio v. EPA, and SEC v. Jarkesy—both individually, and
Why do environmental professionals need to know about a recent securities case? Read on for details. In response to the Wall Street Crash of 1929, Congress passed the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to combat securities fraud and increase market transparency. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is the agency that delegated enforcement of these acts, which until 2010, had to occur in a court of law. In 2010, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) which allowed the SEC to impose penalties through in-house proceedings. These in-house proceedings look similar to those of other agencies, and typically take place in front of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who is employed by the agency but swears to remain impartial. Sound familiar? This framework is much like the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ALJ and Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) paradigm.Continue Reading SEC v. Jarkesy: In-House Adjudicators are Out and the Jury is In