Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Republicans and industry highlight litigation over SEC rulemaking; courts reined in some Dodd‑Frank based efforts
Loading...
Summary
Members and witnesses discussed several SEC rulemakings and litigation outcomes — including the Fifth Circuit’s decision on the private funds rule and debates over section 913 authority — as examples of regulatory overreach or ambiguity that have created legal uncertainty for markets.
Lawmakers and industry witnesses used the committee hearing to highlight litigation that has narrowed or blocked SEC rulemakings rooted in Dodd‑Frank authorities, urging clearer statutory direction from Congress.
Witnesses and members discussed the Fifth Circuit’s unanimous decision vacating the SEC private funds adviser rule and criticism of the agency’s use of section 913 of Dodd‑Frank to justify broad new rules. Tom Quadman and Ken Benson said courts have returned to the question of statutory scope and that ambiguous agency interpretations create uncertainty and discourage capital formation.
Quadman also criticized a withdrawn SEC predictive analytics proposal as unnecessary and said that the commission should work within the limits Congress set. Members argued that litigation over vague statutory grants has produced a costly and uncertain environment for fintech and private‑fund markets.
No changes to statute were made at the hearing. Several members urged Congress to act to clarify the SEC’s authorities, to withdraw or narrow unused discretionary powers and to minimize cross‑agency conflicts that increase legal uncertainty.
