Several weeks ago, the SEC was on the losing end of two decisions in its enforcement action against . Although this decision by the D.C. Circuit may not attract as much attention as the Ripple case, it is arguably a larger blow to the agency. The Ripple case was about a disputed point of law, and it is entirely possible that a different judge might have decided in the SEC's favor. By contrast, this case is about the quality of the SEC's work, particularly insofar as it regulates digital…

The SEC enforcement action and the Commissioners' dissent raise fundamental questions on the appropriate use of regulatory power.

In this case, Commissioners Peirce and Uyeda appear to agree with the majority that the investors likely made an unwise investment decision and based that decision on inadequate information. They part ways with the majority when asserting that regulators should not exercise their power to correct misdeeds if the relevant laws do not give the regulators that…

This decision raises troubling questions. Here are two big ones: 

The appellate decision quotes the Secretary of State declaring that: "[t]here is no room for 'you get what you pay for' when it comes to the quality and integrity of investment advice . . . [The fiduciary duty rule would] enhance[]…

One of the problems with financial regulation is that, contrary to the advice of Bill Belichick, the regulators do not seem adequately focused on doing their job. Recent findings showed that major regional banks failed because, among other things, the regulators were slow to respond to warning signs as to very old-fashioned risks, interest rate mismatches. The to develop standards to climate issues and other "non-traditional financial information."  Now the PCAOB proposes that auditors…