In recent years, independent agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have seen precedent-setting legal challenges that could have a ripple effect across the corporate legal landscape. Perhaps the most notable of these involves Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, a case that raised pressing questions about the constitutionality of these bodies and their processes.
Simultaneously, other substantial challenges keep cropping up, asserting constitutional objections against the FTC. One particularly impactful challenge was AMG Capital Management, striking down the FTC’s authority to obtain equitable monetary relief under the rarely interpretted Section 13(b). The fallout of this decision is likely to be widely felt within boardrooms and legal offices around the country, as it reshapes the risk factors and potential penalties involved in FTC proceedings.
Further developments continue to test the waters of administrative law, adding new contours and considerations to the role of these entities. Among these legal narratives, the decision in Seila Law severed the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) commissioner’s for-cause removal protections, establishing further precedent for potential changes in the way these bodies and positions are governed.
The SEC and the FTC, which already face an inherently complex legal environment due to their dual roles as both regulators and enforcers, are likely to continue facing similar issues as these debates continue. Understanding the potential implications of these challenges – not just in their historical context, but in terms of their possible future impact – is vital for professionals working within the realm of corporate law.
Details of these cases and their effects are outlined in the following article by Venable LLP.