Supreme Court Takes Measured Approach to Regulatory Power in Major June Decisions

The Supreme Court’s biggest recent move was a pair of decisions on June 4 that gave regulators a partial win. In FCC v. AT&T, the Court said the FCC’s forfeiture process does not violate the Seventh Amendment because the agency’s orders are not self-executing and the Justice Department must still go to court to collect penalties. In Sripetch v. SEC, the justices unanimously held that the SEC can seek disgorgement without proving investors suffered actual financial loss, preserving an important enforcement tool. Those rulings came just after another notable action on June 2, when the Court granted interim relief to Alabama in Allen v. Milligan, allowing the state temporary breathing room from a lower-court injunction in a voting-rights dispute. The Court’s recent docket also included Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., where it said Amarin did not state a valid claim for induced patent infringement, ending that appeal at the motion-to-dismiss stage. Taken together, the latest headlines suggest the Court is still willing to scrutinize agency power, but it is not uniformly hostile to regulators; instead, it has been drawing narrower lines around procedure and enforcement. The next wave of attention will likely focus on how these rulings affect federal agencies, securities enforcement, and ongoing voting-rights litigation. Thanks for tuning in, and be sure to subscribe. This has been a quiet please production, for more check out quiet please dot ai. For more http://www.quietplease.ai Get the best deals https://amzn.to/3ODvOta