Regulatory Enforcement

Subscribe to Regulatory Enforcement via RSS

It is no secret that the SEC under the Trump Administration is taking a very different approach to cryptocurrency than the agency did under the Biden Administration. Indeed, a detailed December 2025 New York Times article (here) made it clear – if there were any doubt — that the administration’s more restrained approach to crypto starts at the very top. But what does the more restrained crypto approach mean in practical terms? A January 22, 2026, report from Cornerstone Research, which can be found here, spells out in detail what it means, both in terms of reduced numbers of crypto-related enforcement actions and in diminished crypto-related recoveries.Continue Reading SEC: Less Crypto Enforcement, Lower Crypto Recoveries

In prior posts (most recently here), I have noted the risk to companies in the current global trade environment of governmental enforcement actions relating to the collection and payment of tariffs. Indeed, in a May 12, 2025, memo, Assistant Attorney General Matthew Galeotti identified “trade and customs fraud, including tariff evasion” as the Department of Justice’s number two corporate criminal enforcement priority.

In the latest sign that the Trump administration is ready to aggressively deploy its enforcement tools to ensure compliance with tariffs and other trade goals, the U.S. government has filed a complaint in intervention in a pending qui tam action against a South Carolina furniture company, alleging that the company used false documentation to underreport the price of furniture the company imported from China, resulting in tariff underpayment. The new case underscores the fact that as the current Trump rolls out and enforces its sweeping tariff program, companies will face significant scrutiny and potential claims risk.Continue Reading Trump Administration Brings Tariff Evasion Claim

In numerous public statements, Trump Administration officials have said the Administration intends to use the False Claims Act (FCA) to enforce certain policy priorities. For example, in connection with statements concerning the Administration’s intent to combat “illegal DEI,” officials have declared that corporate DEI policies or practices violating anti-discrimination laws could trigger FCA liability.  There are a number of levels on which potential FCA liability represents a serious corporate liability risk, not least because of the possibility of whistleblowers (including company employees or competitors) launching FCA whistleblower claims. In addition, as discussed below, a recent Southern District of New York ruling highlights how potentially massive FCA liability can be.Continue Reading More About the Trump Administration and Potential False Claims Act Liability

The Trump administration has made it clear that combatting “illegal DEI” is a priority. Indeed, on the first full day after his inauguration, President Trump issued an executive order targeting “Illegal DEI” in the private sector. In early February, Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo directing the U.S. Department of Justice’s positions with respect to DEI. Now, the newly appointed head of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division has issued a separate memo identifying the division’s priorities, with DEI topics given precedence, clearly marking DEI as a DOJ Civil Division enforcement authority, with important implications for companies.   Continue Reading Department of Justice Civil Division Targets “Illegal DEI”

Walker Newell
Theresa Milano

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a June 2024 decision, overruled its 40-year-old precedent known as the “Chevron doctrine.” Under Chevron, federal courts were required to defer to administrative agencies when interpreting statutes that were ambiguous. In the following guest post, Walker Newell, Esq., Vice President at Woodruff Sawyer, and Teresa Milano, Esq., also a Vice President at Woodruff Sawyer, consider the Court’s decision and assess its implications. A version of this article previously was published on Woodruff Sawyer’s D&O Notebook. I would like to thank Walker and Teresa for allowing me to publish their article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is the author’s article.Continue Reading Guest Post: D&O Risk and Insurance in a Post-Chevron World

Investors and entrepreneurs everywhere are impressed with the potentially transformative promise of artificial intelligence. Unfortunately, AI’s seemingly unlimited promise has also attracted companies and other players who, in order to participate in the current AI wave, overstate their AI capabilities. These kinds of statements have already attracted the attention of plaintiffs’ lawyers and the SEC. Now the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has gotten into the act. The agency has launched a “crackdown on deceptive AI claims and schemes” called Operation AI Comply. In a September 25, 2024, press release (here), the FTC announced five recent law enforcement actions the agency has launched against “operations that use AI hype or sell AI technology that can be used in deceptive and unfair ways.” The agency’s initiative highlights the regulatory scrutiny companies can face with respect to the AI-related operations and marketing.Continue Reading FTC Crackdown Highlights AI-Related Regulatory Risk

In recent months, many companies have found themselves under fire from conservative advocates for their stances on ESG-related issues. At the same time, other companies have found themselves facing litigation based on allegations that they have overstated their green credentials (a set of allegations sometimes called “greenwashing”). As two recent cases show, companies can face challenges and potential liability over their sustainability claims.Continue Reading Beverage Companies Face Scrutiny Over Their Green Claims

The SEC has been an active cop on the beat, as reflected in its recently released Enforcement Division statistics for the 2023 fiscal year, ended September 30, 2023. Both the total number of SEC enforcement actions and the number of “standalone” enforcement actions rose in FY 2023 compared to the prior year. The agency also filed the most enforcement actions against public companies since FY 2019. In addition, the SEC obtained the second highest annual amount of financial remedies in SEC history. Continue Reading SEC Stats Show the Agency is an Active Enforcement Cop

Greg Markel
Gershon Akerman

As I noted in a prior post (here), in June, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up a case to consider the legality of the SEC’s use of in-house administrative tribunals, which the agency uses to enforce the federal securities laws. As discussed below in a guest post written by Greg Markel, a partner at the Seyfarth Shaw law firm, and Gershon Akerman, an associate at the firm, the case could have important implications for the SEC’s enforcement authority and could affect the agency’s other activities as well. This article previously was published as a Seyfarth client alert. I would like to thank Greg and Gershon for allowing me to publish their article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is the authors’ article.Continue Reading Guest Post: Sup. Ct. to Rule When Feds Must Provide Enforcement Action Jury Trial

In recent months, the SEC has released a series of proposed rules relating to several different topics, including most significantly its March 2022 release of proposed rules regarding climate change and greenhouse gas emissions disclosure. These various proposed rules are still in the public comment period and it remains to be seen whether the various proposed rules will be adopted and if so in what form. Even assuming some forms of the proposed rules are adopted, the rules almost certainly will be subject to court challenge by business groups and other constituencies. As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in the last days of June in the carbon emissions rulemaking case, groups challenging the SEC’s rules have a potentially potent new tool to use to try to block the rules.
Continue Reading Will the “Major Questions Principle” Block the SEC’s Proposed Climate Change Disclosure Rules?