Supreme Court Rejects A Major SEC Enforcement Tool As Unconstitutional; Jeffrey Plotkin, J.D.

On June 27, 2024, the Supreme Court rejected as unconstitutional the Securities and Exchange Commission’s congressionally-granted power to seek civil monetary penalties for antifraud violations in SEC in-house administrative proceedings.     

For over three decades, Congress significantly expanded the SEC’s enforcement powers by, among other things, authorizing the agency to obtain civil monetary penalties in its in-house administrative proceedings.  Last month, the Supreme Court in SEC v. Jarkesy ruled that Congress had gone too far in empowering the agency to seek civil monetary penalties for fraud violations in-house. The Supreme Court ruled that the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in federal court attaches to such SEC enforcement actions. 

The Supreme Court decision is yet another body blow to the so-called administrative state and is likely to have profound and lasting impact on the SEC and other federal administrative agencies. In addition, the Jarkesy decision also may significantly impact state securities regulation. It is likely that this Supreme Court will have more to say in future cases about overreach of the SEC’s administrative enforcement regime. 

Instructor Jeffrey Plotkin, J.D., a former SEC Enforcement official, discusses the Supreme Court’s Jarkesy decision, focusing on the practical implications of the ruling on RIAs and IARs, as well as BDs and RRs, and he explains the broader consequences of the ruling.. 

Attendees learn answers to questions like:

• How has the role of administrative law proceedings grown in securities law enforcement?  

• What key Federal statutes enabled the SEC to utilize administrative law proceedings in enforcement?

• For RIAs and IARs being examined, investigated, or disciplined by the SEC, what are the practical consequences of the Jarkesy decision?

• What other SEC’s administrative powers may be on the chopping block in future Supreme Court cases?

• How does the Supreme Court’s reasoning potentially affects the administrative powers of state securities regulators?

This class is eligible for one-hour of CE credit towards the CFP^® , CIMA^® and CPWA^® certifications, and PACE credit for the CLU^® and ChFC^® designations.

Who Should Attend: Financial Advisors, CFPs, EAs, CFAs, CPAs financial planners, CPA/PFSs, CIMAs, CLUs and ChFCs.
Cost: Free to members of Advisors4Advisors ($60/Qtr).
CPE credit: 1 hour, in the Economics field of study
Prerequisites: None
Advanced Preparation: None
Course Level: Update
Course Delivery Method: Group Internet-Based
Program Policies: For more information regarding administrative policies such as refund, cancellation and complaint, please email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Advisors4Advisors is registered with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) as a sponsor of continuing professional education on the National Registry of CPE Sponsors. State boards of accountancy have final authority on the acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit. Complaints regarding registered sponsors may be submitted to the National Registry of CPE Sponsors through its website: www.nasbaregistry.org. Advisors4Advisors is also approved as a continuing education sponsor by IWI, which administers the CIMA^® and CPWA^® designations, and CFP Board of Standards, which licenses the designation for CFP^® professionals.