- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aaron Nicodemus2024-07-02T19:43:00
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) extended the statute of limitations for businesses attempting to challenge some federal regulations, allowing regulated entities a longer timeline to appeal a decision.
In a 6-3 decision, issued Monday, SCOTUS opened the door to legal challenges to regulations long after those regulations take effect.
The case, Corner Post v. the Federal Reserve Board, centered on a challenge by a North Dakota truck stop that sued over a Fed regulation related to fees that merchants must pay banks for handling debit card transactions. The fee took effect in 2011; Corner Post did not open until 2018.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
The Supreme Court of the United States overturned a long-held precedent in which courts deferred to federal agencies in interpreting complex or ambiguous regulations–a decision that could make thousands of federal regulations more vulnerable to legal challenges.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s practice of using in-house tribunals overseen by an administrative judge to adjudicate securities fraud cases is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed whistleblower protections guaranteed under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a unanimous decision expected to set a precedent that impacts all corporate internal reporting cases.
Any product that uses AI needs to be safety assessed for its entire lifespan under new rules that went into effect recently across the EU. Experts warned companies using AI to tailor products could be classed as “manufacturers” and face the same duty of care as developed.
When lawmakers slam the U.K.’s chief financial regulator as “incompetent,” it not only opens the doors for others to pile criticism on it, but it sparks a debate about how the organization can be improved–or removed.
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority apologized to investors in peer-to-peer investment firm Collateral for not acting swiftly enough to prevent Collateral from defrauding its customers.
