Jason Pickholz, Book Author and SEC Whistleblower Lawyer On Bloomberg Radio Discussing Supreme Court Case Involving Whistleblowers —
Jason Pickholz appeared as a guest SEC whistleblower lawyer on Bloomberg Radio to discuss today’s U.S. Supreme Court arguments in Digital Realty v. Somers. This case is being closely watched by SEC whistleblower attorneys and corporate lawyers alike.
Mr. Pickholz appeared on the program as an SEC whistleblower lawyer, while another guest spoke from the corporate perspective. In addition to the facts and legal issues involved in the case, topics covered during the program included the ramifications of the possible outcomes for SEC whistleblowers and corporate employers, the SEC whistleblower process itself, and more.
You can listen to the full program below:
Jason Pickholz, SEC whistleblower lawyer on Bloomberg Radio — “Supreme Court Hears Corporate Whistle-Blower Case,” Bloomberg Law Show (Bloomberg Radio), host: June Grasso, producer: David Sucherman (Nov. 28, 2017).
Background Of The Case
In Digital Realty, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a confusing issue of the SEC whistleblower program: whether whistleblowers who report internally to their companies are protected by the Dodd-Frank Act’s anti-retaliation provisions, or whether they must report to the SEC in order to receive those protections. Since 2010 when the Dodd-Frank Act was passed, this has been the most heavily litigated issue involving the SEC whistleblower program.
In 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that to be protected against retaliation by the Dodd-Frank Act, a whistleblower must report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. According to the Fifth Circuit, a whistleblower who only reports the violations or frauds internally to his or her company is not protected from retaliation by Dodd-Frank. That case was Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA) LLC. Since then, at least ten U.S. District Courts have agreed with the Fifth Circuit.
Two years after Asadi, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit disagreed with the Fifth Circuit. According to the Second Circuit, a whistleblower who reports internally, but who does not also report to the SEC, is still protected by Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provisions.
Earlier this year (2017), in Digital Realty v. Somers, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that an employee who was fired for reporting violations internally, but who did not report the violations to the SEC, was still protected by Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provisions. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the Second Circuit. At least fourteen U.S. District Courts have taken the same position as the Second and Ninth Circuits.
The views of the Second Circuit, along with the Ninth Circuit decision in Digital Realty, clashed with the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in Asadi. As a result of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Digital Realty, there was now an actual conflict between several different U.S. Courts of Appeals. For this reason and others, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Digital Realty case to resolve the dispute.
The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to come out later this Term.
For an earlier discussion of the Digital Realty case, please click here.
* * *
As an SEC whistleblower law firm, The Pickholz Law Offices has represented employees, officers, and others in SEC whistleblower cases involving financial institutions and public companies listed in the Fortune Top 10, Top 20, Top 50, Top 100, Top 500, and the Forbes Global 2000. We were the first law firm ever to win an SEC whistleblower award for a client on appeal to the full Commission in Washington, an achievement that Inside Counsel magazine named one of the five milestones of the SEC whistleblower program.
For more information about The Pickholz Law Offices, you can click on any of the links in the margins of this page.
If you would like to speak with an SEC whistleblower lawyer, please feel free to call Jason R. Pickholz at 347-746-1222.
The above information is not and should not be construed as providing legal advice. It is not and should never be considered as a substitute for consulting with your own attorney. The use of this web site or this page does not constitute or create any attorney-client, fiduciary, or confidential relationship between The Pickholz Law Offices LLC and anyone using this web site, or anyone else. The information contained on this website is for informational purposes only. The content of this web site may not reflect current developments. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Results of prior cases or matters contained on this web site are not indicative of future results or outcomes, and should not be taken as a prediction, promise, or guarantee of any future result or outcome. No one who accesses this web site should act or refrain from acting based on anything contained on this web site. For additional terms and conditions governing the use of this web site, please click on the “disclaimer” link at the bottom of this page or click here.