Contact us with your California corporate & securities law questions (949) 353-6347 or Contact us here

Ninth Circuit Accords Chevron Deference To The SEC, What Would Judge Gorsuch Say?

Last week, I noted that Judge Gorsuch has expressed a certain skepticism of Chevron deference.  The next day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Securities and Exchange Commission's interpretation of Section 19(d)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act is entitled to Chevron deference. Sharemaster v. United States SEC, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1827 (9th Cir. Feb. 2, 2017).  That statute authorizes the SEC to review an "final disciplinary sanction" imposed by a registered securities industry self-regulatory organization, including the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.  The case arose when the FINRA imposed a $1,000 late fee on a broker.  The broker paid the fine in order to obtain a lifting of FINRA's suspension and then sought review by the SEC.  The SEC, however, found that that Section 19(d)2) permitted review of only "live" disciplinary sanctions.  In an opinion penned by Judge Consuelo María Callahan, the Ninth Circuit held that the SEC's interpretation was entitled to deference.  However, the broker, who was appearing pro se, persuaded the panel that the SEC unreasonably decided that the monetary penalty imposed by FINRA was not a sanction and thus not a live disciplinary sanction.

Pro se or propria persona?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the broker's "pro se petition for review".  The Court noted that the broker could appear pro se because it was a sole proprietorship.  "Pro se" is, of course, Latin phrase meaning on behalf of himself/herself/itself.  Lawyers and courts also refer to a litigant appearing "pro per".  This is short for "propria persona" which means one's own person.  Which is correct?  The California legislature uses both terms.  See, e.g., Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.510(h) ("The requesting attorney or party appearing in propria persona shall . . .") and Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 575.2 ("a party represented by counsel, or a party if in pro se . . .").

Share on:

Enforcement & Investigations, Cheveron deference, Consuelo Maria Callahan, finra, Section 19(d), Sharemaster v. SEC

ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING CALIFORNIA CORPORATE AND SECURITIES LAW? CONTACT US DIRECTLY

We offer expert advice with the intricacies of California law.

Our years of experience and expertise allow us to help clients navigate the business laws in California.

CONTACT US

Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy

ABOUT OUR AUTHOR

30172DBAB0084D3A8F39D7AF0A8E79BC.ashx Keith Paul Bishop
Partner at Allen Matkins
(949) 353-6328
 Contact me
Learn More About Keith

nominee-badge

Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy

CATEGORIES

see all

RECOGNITION

YOUTUBE

FACEBOOK