lawrota.com

The recent oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court delve into the broader implications for administrative actions impacting “private rights,” from immigration to environmental concerns. The case’s core revolves around whether such actions infringe upon the Seventh Amendment, particularly concerning the SEC’s enforcement against Jarkesy. The court’s focus on the 1977 case, Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, provides a historical context, suggesting that Congress may assign adjudication of new statutory “public rights” to an administrative agency without violating the Seventh Amendment.

Jarkesy’s counsel, Michael McColloch, maintains that they aren’t seeking a significant change, but the questions raised during arguments indicate a desire for potential shifts. While three issues were initially raised, the majority of the discussion centered around the Seventh Amendment, with McColloch attempting to navigate a path within the framework of Atlas Roofing.

Notably, the court faces the challenge of either distinguishing, overruling, or affirming Atlas Roofing, and McColloch’s argument hinges on modifications made by subsequent cases. The crux of his position is to equate securities fraud enforcement with common-law fraud claims, asserting that recent cases have eroded the applicability of Atlas Roofing.

As the court considers the impact of government agencies on daily life, concerns arise about the extent of agency enforcement powers and the potential erosion of the right to a jury trial. Chief Justice John Roberts raises questions about the government’s size and its influence on citizens’ lives, prompting reflections on constitutional principles and the reliance on Atlas Roofing.

The justices grapple with the idea of excluding certain areas traditionally litigated outside of court processes, with Justice Sotomayor highlighting the challenge of defining such boundaries. A conservative undertone emphasizes the growth of federal government impact, suggesting a need for constraints on agency powers.

In what appears to be a compromise, Justice Alito proposes deciding the case on the narrow ground that statutory securities fraud claims closely resemble common law fraud actions. While potential extreme outcomes are sidestepped, the court seems inclined to restrict agency enforcement powers.

The case’s decision, expected by June, forms part of a trio of major cases scrutinizing administrative agency powers and limits during this term.

source: The SEC case is really about Congress’s power to let agencies address today’s problems (lawdork.com)

#SeventhAmendment #AdministrativeEnforcement #SupremeCourt #LegalRights #SECvJarkesy #ConstitutionalPrinciples