The US Supreme Court has already heard enough What is insider trading and what is notHe does not intend to hear anything else. However, I do not mind forcing the Second Court of Appeal, which it has I heard more squabbles on this issue from the Supreme Court It showed itself Somewhat confused On Subject, to me Listen to her more.
The Supreme Court said that the second U.S. Court of Appeals should review its 2019 decision that non-public information from the US Centers for Medicare and Medicare (CMS) was proprietary under the Federal Securities Fraud Act, in light of the Supreme Court ruling last year in the Bridgegate case. Which limited how prosecutors use property fraud laws to go after government plots.
To review, a little over six years ago, the aforementioned Second Circuit said insider trading, if it exists at all, There is not as much as pretenders like to believeAnd certainly not as much You might like Brett Beharara. At the time, the Supreme Court turned away from this debate, but after two years of reflection, it ruled, Yes, It definitely exists, And it was nearly as broad as we all thought before the second circle opened up this stage of the epistemic debate.
Then last year, Supremes said that Chris Christie & Company. They were certainly corrupt when they decided to disturb the traffic on the George Washington Bridge as a political throwback, but they are They did not violate the specific law in question, Because the opening and closing of the lanes leading to the river crossing cannot be called exactly governmental property. This got hedge fund managers thinking, “Hey, what about those advice we bought from them That “political intelligence” man. Who, in turn, got it from his friend at CMS? “Perhaps these things are intangible enough to conflict with Bridgegate’s limitations? And they seem to be, even if it is John Roberts & Co.. I decided to delegate the narration of this to the participants in Foley Square.”
The US Supreme Court today rejected a petition for a transfer order in the case of NCLA agent Christopher Gibson…. The Saudi Electricity Company’s scheme failed to follow two controlling decisions of the Supreme Court ….
But, crucially and unfortunately for Gibson, it’s not the release he released yesterday.
The Supreme Court ordered 2nd Circ to reconsider the hedge fund insider trading case [Reuters]
There is no higher court looking for a judge’s appeal process inside the SEC headquarters [Bloomberg Law]
The US Supreme Court will not hear the removal protection appeal for in-house judges on the SEC [press release]