SEC v. Jarkesy

[rambot]

Heard of this stuff?

It seems really, really off-putting to me. At its wildest this will create ruin for a lot of people and enrich a lot of psychopaths.

SEC v. Jarkesy: The Threat to Congressional and Agency Authority

Maybe you can make me think this will be okay? Anyone willing to take a stab?

 

[johansen]

SEC v. Jarkesy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In May 2022, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held, under certain statutory provisions, the Securities and Exchanges Commission's administrative adjudication of fraud claims without jury trials in their administrative proceedings with their own administrative law judges (ALJs) violated three provisions of the Constitution.

in general, i agree with this ruling. we need to dissolve the secret courts, dissolve a lot of the non trial by jury courts, etc. judges need to be able to be held accountable, and they need to be able to be removed by the people.

all 50 states should allow charges to be brought by individuals, not through the gatekeeping prosecutors/police departments, to the courts directly.. etc, etc.

if thousands of more courts have to be created, in order to handle the case load, then so be it.

"In response to the 2008 market crash,[10] Congress purported to empower[11] the SEC to impose harsh civil penalties[12] against any[8] private citizen through its own administrative adjudications with only limited, after-the-fact review by a federal court of appeals.[13] Dodd-Frank effectively bestowed[14] to the SEC "coextensive" authority with federal court to impose civil penalties.[15][8][11]"

never let a crisis go to waste...

 

[rambot]

SEC v. Jarkesy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In May 2022, Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held, under certain statutory provisions, the Securities and Exchanges Commission's administrative adjudication of fraud claims without jury trials in their administrative proceedings with their own administrative law judges (ALJs) violated three provisions of the Constitution.

in general, i agree with this ruling. we need to dissolve the secret courts, dissolve a lot of the non trial by jury courts, etc. judges need to be able to be held accountable, and they need to be able to be removed by the people.

all 50 states should allow charges to be brought by individuals, not through the gatekeeping prosecutors/police departments, to the courts directly.. etc, etc.

if thousands of more courts have to be created, in order to handle the case load, then so be it.

"In response to the 2008 market crash,[10] Congress purported to empower[11] the SEC to impose harsh civil penalties[12] against any[8] private citizen through its own administrative adjudications with only limited, after-the-fact review by a federal court of appeals.[13] Dodd-Frank effectively bestowed[14] to the SEC "coextensive" authority with federal court to impose civil penalties.[15][8][11]"

never let a crisis go to waste...

And the money foe those courts will come feom where?

Are you not concerned about other organizations with delegations losing power? I'd think things like the fda are pretty cool.

 

[essentialsaltes]

IANAL

I do have some concern about 'courts' that are in the executive. It's a bit like when companies require you to go to arbitration rather than the courts. And they pay the arbitrators' salaries.

At the same time, you can see the obvious usefulness of the idea. People who are experts in what the SEC does, or the FDA, or public utility regulation, or... having all those complex cases sent into the general court system is not a plan for accuracy, efficiency and success.

 

[johansen]

And they pay the arbitrators' salaries.

exactly...

show me a bank that paid a fine that was more than the money they made stealing

 

[essentialsaltes]

IANAL

I do have some concern about 'courts' that are in the executive.

So did SCOTUS.

In conservative win, Supreme Court limits use of SEC in-house tribunals​

Justices said the SEC’s reliance on internal tribunals, rather than federal courts, to bring enforcement actions for securities fraud violates the Constitution.

The justices were reviewing a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that said the SEC’s in-house tribunals violated the Seventh Amendment, which guarantees the right to a jury trial. The appeals court said Congress exceeded its power in allowing such tribunals and that the job security provided to administrative law judges who hear such cases infringed on the executive branch’s prerogatives.

Justice Elena Kagan said during oral arguments in SEC v. Jarkesy that the 5th Circuit ruling contradicted a 1977 opinion by the high court that backed the powers of a workplace safety commission to conduct administrative hearings. That case, Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission came up more than 100 times during the November discussion.

“The constitutionality of hundreds of statutes may now be in peril, and dozens of agencies could be stripped of their power to enforce laws enacted by Congress,” wrote Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

 

[Arcangl86]

I mean the dismantling of the administrative state has been a pet project of the right for awhile, and they at the very least struck a serious body blow with this.

 

[johansen]

1977 opinion

yes, not that long ago was it.

maybe need to go back a couple hundred more years to find a reasonable state of affairs regarding how much power the federal government was supposed to have.

 

[essentialsaltes]

maybe need to go back a couple hundred more years to find a reasonable state of affairs regarding how much power the federal government was supposed to have.

Possibly you meant the executive branch. This decision just moves cases into the federal courts, which is obviously part of the federal government.