WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court safeguarded investor-protection laws on Wednesday by refusing to further narrow the scope of who can be held liable for securities fraud, upholding a lower court ruling against a New York investment banker banned from the industry by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Writing on behalf of the court, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said perpetrators of securities fraud could escape liability if the law were interpreted narrowly. In his dissenting opinion, Thomas said the ruling “misconstrues the securities laws and flouts our precedent in a way that is likely to have far-reaching consequences.” Thomas said under the ruling, for example, there would be nothing to stop an executive assistant from being hit with sanctions for merely transmitting a supervisor’s email.
Anti-fraud provisions of U.S. securities laws prohibit false statements and other conduct categorized as acts, devices, practices or schemes. The case hinged on whether a person who did not personally make fraudulent statements but merely passed them along can be found liable for engaging in a fraudulent scheme.
Good
We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
U.S. top court undermines Google settlement in internet privacy caseWASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday cast doubt on a $8.5 million se... What happened to the “Do no evil” mantra ?
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Thomas speaks as U.S. high court weighs death row inmate's race claimThe U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared poised to side with a black Mississ... ФАК ОФФ
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
U.S. top court jeopardizes Google settlement in internet privacy caseWASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday put in jeopardy an $8.5 million...
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »
Opinion | Will the Supreme Court unleash a frenzy of GOP partisan gerrymandering?Opinion: Will the Supreme Court unleash a frenzy of GOP partisan gerrymandering? Articles written based on emotions are bad for business Trump self-evidenced the collusion, and his crime family's meetings with Russian agents confirmed it, then Trump's private meetings with putin doubled down on it. Americans witnessed collusion and obstruction of justice, despite Barr political spin. WeMustExtractJusticeOurselves Democrats never did this.
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »
Opinion | Elections all over America may be decided by these two Supreme Court casesOpinion | Jessica Levinson: 'It is likely the justices will conclude that federal courts shouldn't police claims of partisan gerrymandering, essentially legalizing vote dilution.' - NBCNewsTHINK THINK People voting for candidates who promise to tax people who aren't them is vote dilution. There's a lack of representation according to taxation. THINK No surprise there, conservatives know they don't have majority support. THINK And republicons continue to degrade this country and our democracy. Going into the sh*ts because of them.
Source: NBCNews - 🏆 10. / 86 Read more »
Supreme Court hears arguments over partisan redistrictingWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is returning to arguments over whether the political task of redistricting can be overly partisan.
Source: YahooNews - 🏆 380. / 59 Read more »
Supreme Court weighs crackdown on gerrymanderingWith Kennedy replaced on the bench by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, most experts agree new limits on gerrymandering are no more likely this time around Shame to be honest. Gerrymandering is a real problem that both parties should be concerned about dinjup27 In what world could the SCOTUS rule in favor of gerrymandering? This is likely naive - but I hold out hope that Roberts' conscience won't let him sell democracy down the river when push comes to shove.
Source: politico - 🏆 381. / 59 Read more »
Bump stock ban takes effect as opponents await word from Supreme CourtWhile one justice rejected a request to delay the ban, another was still pending Tuesday, the day it took effect. The one good Trump policy Trump supporters be like: 'Obama took my guns!' 'Trump took my bump stocks!' Waah! They said Obama would take their guns away but he didn’t. Now Trump is taking their bump stocks. Crickets
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »
A familiar Supreme Court pattern as justices review extreme partisan gerrymanderingLiberal justices think it is a threat, and conservatives wonder whether courts have a role in policing it. Hmm. the Maryland gerrymander was done by Democrats so that one will be unconstitutional. The North Carolina gerrymander was done by Republicans so that one will be constitutional. They will be allowed eleven of ten districts. I hate this court, truly, truly hate this court. What is 'extreme gerrymandering'? Gerrymandering itself is not democracy
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »