In prior posts (most recently here), I have noted the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent predilection for taking up cases arising under the securities laws or otherwise involving securities lawsuits. On January 12, 2018, the Court reinforced this impression again by agreeing to take up yet another case arising under the securities laws. In this latest case the Court will address the question of whether or not the SEC’s administrative law judges (ALJ) were appointed in violation of the requirements of the Appointments Clause in the U.S. Constitution. The specific question involved is whether or not the ALJs are “inferior officers” of the type that under the Constitution must be appointed by the “Heads of Departments,” or whether they are just regular federal employees. The case could have significant ramifications not only for the SEC but for a variety of other federal agencies as well. The U.S. Supreme Court’s January 12, 2018 order in the case of Raymond James Lucia v. SEC can be found here.
Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Challenge to Constitutionality of SEC ALJs’ Appointment
Many Companies’ Most Significant Regulatory Risks Are Not in Their Home Country
When Chinese regulators hit GlaxoSmithKline with a $489 million penalty last month – the largest corporate penalty ever in China – it set off alarm bells around the world. Among other things it sent out a “wake-up call for global companies that assumed that their main regulatory risk is in their home countries,” according to
The Long Arm of U.S. Regulatory Enforcement and the Cross-Border Reach of U.S. Laws
One of the most distinctive aspects of the current global regulatory environment has been the increasing willingness of U.S. regulators to try to project U.S. enforcement authority outside the U.S. The cross-border assertion of U.S. regulatory authority has taken place across a broad range of regulatory and compliance issues, including, for example, antitrust, trade sanction,