Malouf v. Securities and Exchange Commission
Petition for certiorari denied on March 9, 2020.
Issue
(1) Under what circumstances will "reasonable grounds," as used in the Securities and Exchange Act, Section 78y(c)(i), and the Investment Advisers Act, Section 80b-13(a), and in other federal statutes, excuse a failure to urge before the Securities and Exchange Commission a valid appointments-clause objection to an unconstitutionally selected administrative law judge; (2) whether an administrative-exhaustion requirement like that in the Securities Act, Section 77i(a), without any express exceptions, and in other federal statutes, is a "jurisdictional condition" to review of a valid appointments-clause objection by an Article III court or a "claim-processing" rule; and (3) whether "equitable exceptions" may excuse non-compliance with the administrative-exhaustion requirement in Section 77i(a) of the Securities Act and in other federal statutes that do not contain any express exceptions.
Recommended Citation: Malouf v. Securities and Exchange Commission, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/malouf-v-securities-and-exchange-commission/