Why the Supreme Court May Review the S.E.C.s In-House Judges
'The claim that the Securities and Exchange Commission gets a big boost from bringing enforcement actions before its own administrative law judges has become a matter of lore, at least among the members of the securities defense bar.
A decision issued last week by an in-house judge in the case of Barbara Duka, a former Standard & Poor’s ratings service executive, shows that even if there is a benefit, it does not always work to the regulator’s advantage.
More important, an issue that has been lurking for almost two years about whether the appointment of these judges was proper under the Constitution looks as if it will come to a head in the Supreme Court’s coming term. . .
To the extent other agencies use the same procedures for hiring the in-house judges as the S.E.C., a Supreme Court decision finding a violation of the Appointments Clause could have a major impact. Although current cases could be remedied by reappointing the same judges by an official appointed by the president, numerous past decisions barring individuals from industries or requiring future conduct could be called into question because the judge did not have the authority to issue a ruling at the time.'>>>
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/business/dealbook/in-house-judges.html?
