Securities Litigation Partner Jose Lopez shared insight on the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) may seek disgorgement, the legal remedy that forces wrongdoers to give back ill-gotten gains, without needing to prove that investors suffered specific, quantifiable financial losses. Leaning on his experience as an SEC enforcement attorney, Jose analyzed what the Sripetch v. SEC decision means for investors and securities practitioners.

Jose told Reuters that the court's ruling "preserved one of the SEC's most potent weapons in its enforcement arsenal.” He added that “the unanimous decision, which is rare these days, shows a clear message that the court is willing to sustain agencies and preserve them where their core mission is legitimate, and here it's investor protection,” in a Checkpoint News article.

Looking ahead, Jose identified an issue the Court left unresolved: "the court did not weigh in on the risk raised by an amici that the Sripetch decision could result in the SEC transforming disgorgement into a penalty. Accordingly, securities practitioners will likely continue to dispute the amount and nature of disgorgement in securities enforcement cases, arguing that any request for disgorgement is really a penalty in disguise,” he told Seeking Alpha.

Jose’s analysis was featured across various outlets, including: