Trump administration

Subscribe to Trump administration 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

The Trump Administration has already shown that it intends to use the False Claims Act (FCA) as one of the primary tools in its arsenal to enforce its policy priorities. For example, as discussed in prior posts on this site (most recently here), the administration is actively using the FCA to enforce its tariff policies. In the latest demonstration that the FCA may now be the administration’s preferred enforcement tool, the administration appears to be actively gearing up to use the FCA as a primary weapon in its campaign against “illegal DEI,” in an apparent use of the FCA commentators agree would be, at a minimum, “novel.” The administration’s use of the FCA for these purposes could pose significant challenges for companies — and their insurers.Continue Reading The Trump Administration Use of the False Claims Act in Anti-DEI Campaign

Sarah Abrams

The Trump administration has already demonstrated that it intends to actively pursue tariff enforcement, as discussed in prior posts on this site (most recently here). One of the enforcement tools the administration is using is the False Claims Act. In the following post, Sarah Abrams, Head of Claims Baleen Specialty, a division of Bowhead Specialty, takes a look at the ways the administration is using the False Claims Act as an enforcement tool, in the context of two recent enforcement actions. My thanks to Sarah for allowing me to publish her article as a guest post on this site. Here is Sarah’s article.Continue Reading Guest Post: False Claims Act Tariff Enforcement

The directors’ and officers’ liability environment is always changing, but 2025 was a particularly eventful year, with important consequences for the D&O insurance marketplace. The past year’s many developments also have significant implications for what may lie ahead in 2026 – and possibly for years to come.  I have set out below the Top Ten D&O Stories of 2025, with a focus on future implications. Please note that on Thursday, January 15, 2026 at 11:00 am EST, my colleagues Marissa Streckfus, Chris Bertola, and I will be conducting a free, hour-long webinar in which we will discuss The Top Ten D&O Stories of 2025. Registration for the webinar can be found here. Please join us for the webinar.Continue Reading The Top Ten D&O Stories of 2025

Sarah Abrams

Among one of many changes afoot at the SEC under its current Chair Paul Atkins is Atkins’s proposal calling for the agency to reconsider its rule allowing shareholders to include non-binding shareholder resolutions in corporate proxy materials. In the following guest post, Sarah Abrams, Head of Claims Baleen Specialty, a division of Bowhead Specialty, takes a look at Atkins’s proposal concerning shareholder resolutions and considers the potential impact of a rule change on D&O liability. I would like to thank Sarah for allowing me to publish her article on this site.Continue Reading Guest Post: Is the SEC Signaling the End of ESG Shareholder Proposals?

The imposition of tariffs is a key component of the current Trump administration’s trade policies. A corollary of the tariff policies is that the administration is also giving high priority to enforcement of the tariffs. In the latest illustration of the administration’s tariff enforcement approach, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey has brought criminal tariff evasion charges against an Indonesian jewelry firm, the company’s founder, and two company employees, based on allegations that the company engaged in a multi-year scheme to evade payment tariffs due on over $1 billion of jewelry and gold the company imported to the U.S. A copy of the November 17, 2025, criminal complaint can be found here. The U.S. Attorney’s Office’s November 17, 2025 press release about the complaint can be found here.Continue Reading U.S. Brings Criminal Tariff Evasion Enforcement Action

As detailed in a recent guest post on this site, authorities in a variety of jurisdictions around the country and around the world are grappling with the right approach to regulate AI. Several U.S. state legislatures, including those in California, Colorado, Utah and Texas, among others, have already enacted AI-specific laws. Now, on December 11, 2025, the White House issued a new Executive Order entitled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence” (here). The new EO seeks to override or preempt state laws on AI in favor of unified federal regulation. As discussed below, the order raises a number of concerns and may face both resistance and court challenge.Continue Reading White House Issues Executive Order Targeting State AI Regulation

Alexander Hopkins

One of the most important developments in the business, economic and financial arenas has been the recent emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The advent of the AI era has also presented novel legal issues and has presented regulators with a host of potential challenges. In the following guest post, Alexander Hopkins takes a look at the developing efforts of a variety of governmental regulators to address the issues that AI presents, and considers the implications of these regulatory developments for the liabilities of corporate directors and officers. Alex is Of Counsel at the Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. law firm. I would like to thank Alex for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site.Continue Reading Guest Post: Global AI Regulations: D&O Liability Implications in a Changing Legal Landscape

It is already well understood that there has been a change in direction at the SEC under the current Trump Administration and SEC Chair Paul Atkins. In a speech earlier this week at the New York Stock Exchange entitled “Revitalizing America’s Markets at 250,” Atkins described the ways in which he thought the agency in recent times has lost its direction, particularly with respect to its public company disclosure requirements. With the stated aim of restoring its original mission, Atkins identified two main public company disclosure reform goals for the agency. He also set out “three pillars” to “make IPOs great again.” Atkins’s IPO-related remarks include brief but noteworthy comments about securities class action litigation reform that have largely been overlooked in the press coverage of his speech.Continue Reading SEC Chair Paul Atkins and Public Company Disclosure Reform

In the 2025 fiscal year (ended September 30, 2025), the SEC’s enforcement activity, as measured by the number of stand-alone enforcement actions, was at its lowest level in ten years. While the decline was reflected across many categories of SEC enforcement, there were certain specific areas – such as cases involving insider trading and market manipulation – where SEC activity actually increased. And notwithstanding the overall decline in SEC enforcement activity, there are signs to suggest that foreign companies listed on U.S. exchanges should be prepared heightened SEC scrutiny and enforcement activity, as discussed below.Continue Reading SEC Enforcement Actions Decline, But Foreign Cos. Should Remain Vigilant