Roush and Khader Author NYU Law School Compliance and Enforcement Blog Post on SCOTUS Federal Trade Commission Ruling

The article “Revealing Potential New Strategy, FTC Teams Up with States After Supreme Court Rules Agency Not Authorized to Seek Monetary Remedies Under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act” has been published by the New York University School of Law Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement on its Compliance & Enforcement blog. First published as an Akin Gump client alert, it was written by antitrust/competition practice head Corey Roush and associate Mitchell Khader.

The article discusses an April Supreme Court ruling in a case involving deceptive payday lending practices. As Roush and Khader note, the decision “dismantled a longstanding [Federal Trade Commission] enforcement tool in a unanimous decision holding that the FTC Act [of 1914] does not permit the agency to use its authority to seek injunctive relief under Section 13(b) as a means to pursue monetary remedies against wrongdoers.” Section 13(b), they write, “granted the agency the authority to seek injunctions in federal district court to halt unfair and deceptive practices.”

As a result of the decision, the authors note that the FTC is now “attempting to work around the Supreme Court’s decision by joining with states who can seek monetary relief under state statutes to challenge allegedly unfair and deceptive conduct.” There is no doubt, though, they say, that the Supreme Court “has severely hampered the FTC’s ability to secure monetary relief against companies accused of unfair or deceptive practices.” Until Section 13(b) is revised, they suggest that “companies facing such allegations will have more bargaining power in settlement talks.”

To read the full article, please click here.