Recent Supreme Court decisions have placed restrictions on the implied private right of action for securities fraud asserted under §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Although the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is not required to plead and prove the elements of reliance, loss causation and damages, the applicability to the SEC of some of the judicially created private action limitations is less clear. Most recently, on June 24, 2010, in Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank Ltd.1 the U.S. Supreme Court limited the territorial scope of §10(b) and held it applies only to prohibited conduct “in connection with the purchase or sale of a security listed on a national stock exchange and the purchase or sale of any other security in the United States.”
The interesting issue of Morrison’s applicability to SEC actions was foreclosed immediately by passage of the Dodd-Frank Act as discussed below, although its impact upon private actions has been dramatic. However, since lower courts are struggling with the applicability to the SEC of other recent Supreme Court decisions limiting private actions under §10(b), it is useful to review Morrison and Dodd-Frank to gain possible insights into other pending issues.
Distinctions Raised by SEC