This decision is similar to the Massachusetts case in which the judge held that the market could comply with both CFTC regulation and State law, so that there was not impossible conflict between the two.  

Ultimately, it seems that this matter will go to the Supreme Court unless Congress resolves the issue, which would be the preferable outcome. This is properly a matter for legislative judgment, not for judicial "interpretation."  

The first two of the bills are, for all practical purposes, in direct response to, and repudiation of, Mr. Gensler's term as Chair of the SEC.  

CAT, the gargantuan trade reporting and data collection system that was championed by Mr. Gensler has, unsurprisingly, turned out to be far more expensive than the SEC estimated when the relevant rules were adopted. Further, with the change in Administrations, the concerns raised by Commissioner Peirce, among others, that it was…

The majority completely sidestepped an important Fifth Amendment argument raised by President Trump, that Governor Cook was not entitled to a hearing because her position at the Fed did not raise a question of "life, liberty, or property." The majority's due-process holding rested on the statutory notice-and-hearing requirement than on resolving the constitutional property-interest debate. The fight over whether Governor Cook has a "property right" in the Fed seat was not ignored by the…

One significant aspect of this effort is that cross-margining of SEC-CFTC products likely means that cross-margined accounts become subject to the CFTC bankruptcy scheme rather than the SEC scheme because the CFTC does not provide insurance in the manner of SIPA. It is much easier to push products away from the insurance protection than to provide it to products that don't already have it (which would require Congressional action.)