FOLLOW US

In a pivotal week for the American administrative state, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued two landmark rulings that reaffirm the enforcement authority of federal regulators. By deciding in favor of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Court has provided much-needed clarity on agency powers, effectively drawing a line in the sand following its 2024 precedent in SEC v. Jarkesy.

The Rulings: A Brief Overview

On June 4, 2026, the Supreme Court handed down decisions in two high-profile cases that challenged the internal enforcement mechanisms of these powerful federal agencies:

• FCC v. AT&T, Inc. (and Verizon): In an 8-1 decision, the Court upheld the FCC’s authority to issue "forfeiture orders"—monetary penalties for regulatory violations—without providing a jury trial at the initial administrative stage. The Court clarified that because these orders are not immediately enforceable and do not constitute a final determination of legal obligation, they do not violate the Seventh Amendment’s right to a jury trial.

• Sripetch v. SEC: The Court ruled unanimously to preserve the SEC’s "disgorgement" power. Justices affirmed that the SEC does not need to prove that investors suffered actual, quantifiable financial losses to seek the return of illegally obtained profits. The Court characterized disgorgement as an equitable remedy based on the defendant’s ill-gotten gains, rather than the victim's loss.

Why This Matters for Regulatory Enforcement

These rulings are being viewed by legal experts as "technical wins" that prevent a broader dismantling of the administrative state. While recent years have seen the Court signal skepticism toward federal agency overreach, these decisions indicate a willingness to protect established regulatory tools—provided they operate within specific constitutional guardrails.

Implications for Businesses and Consumers

For regulated industries, the decisions provide a clear framework for compliance. The Court’s rejection of arguments to extend SEC v. Jarkesy to the FCC underscores that agencies can continue to function as intended by Congress.

For the general public, the rulings are a significant victory for consumer protection. By maintaining the agencies' ability to investigate corporate misconduct—such as the mishandling of customer location data in the FCC case or pump-and-dump financial schemes in the SEC case—the Court has ensured that federal watchdogs remain "in the driver's seat" when holding powerful companies accountable.