Jury Trials For Environmental Enforcement: What Now After SEC v. Jarkesy?

GT
Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Contributor

Greenberg Traurig, LLP has more than 2750 attorneys in 47 locations in the United States, Europe and the Middle East, Latin America, and Asia. The firm is a 2022 BTI “Highly Recommended Law Firm” for superior client service and is consistently among the top firms on the Am Law Global 100 and NLJ 500. Greenberg Traurig is Mansfield Rule 6.0 Certified Plus by The Diversity Lab. The firm is recognized for powering its U.S. offices with 100% renewable energy as certified by the Center for Resource Solutions Green-e® Energy program and is a member of the U.S. EPA’s Green Power Partnership Program. The firm is known for its philanthropic giving, innovation, diversity, and pro bono. Web: www.gtlaw.com.
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, No. 22-859, holding that the SEC cannot assess civil penalties for securities fraud through an administrative tribunal.
United States Environment
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, No. 22-859 (U.S. June 27, 2024), holding that the SEC cannot assess civil penalties for securities fraud through an administrative tribunal. As the court well-understood, the decision has implications for many areas of federal regulatory enforcement, including environmental law. So what does it mean for the environmental practice?

Continue reading the full article, published by The Legal Intelligencer July 12, 2024. Reprinted with permission.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More