Ilya Shapiro comments on SCOTUS arguments about Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy

New York, NY – Today, the Supreme Court heard arguments on the case known as Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, in which commentators argue that the right to trial by jury as well as the power of the administrative state are at stake. The Manhattan Institute's director of constitutional studies Ilya Shapiro offers the following analysis of the session:

"In an argument that went over two hours, the justices largely ignored the administrative-law issues that drew many observers to the Jarkesy case, to focus instead on the basic question of whether securities-law violations were the sorts of common-law charges that have to come before a jury under the Seventh Amendment. If they are—and I think that’s where a majority is leaning—then the SEC’s system of administrative law judges (ALJs) falls and the agency will have to pursue its claims directly in federal court. That’s a win for constitutional protections of civil liberties. But it would leave the meatier issue of the permissible scope of congressional delegation of legislative power, the focus of an amicus brief MI joined, for another day."

Ilya Shapiro is director of constitutional studies and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Please direct media inquiries to press officer Nic Abouchedid at nabouchedid@manhattan.institute