IRONRIDGE

[factcheck14]

Court Enjoins SEC Administrative Proceeding

http://calcorporatelaw.com/2015/11/court-enjoins-sec-administrative-proceeding/

I am pleased to learn that a federal judge understands the basic unfairness of forcing people to endure an unconstitutional hearing. In Ironridge Global IV, Ltd. et al. v. SEC, (U.S. Dist. Ct. Case No. 1:15-CV-2512-LMM (Nov. 17, 2015)), Judge Leigh Martin May ruled that the plaintiffs had “a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that the SEC has violated the Appointments Clause [U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 2.]”.

Much could be said about this ruling, but I was most pleased by Judge May’s common-sense understanding:

"If Plaintiffs are required to raise their constitutional law claims following the administrative proceeding, they will be forced to endure what they contend is an unconstitutional process. Plaintiffs could raise their constitutional arguments only after going through the process they contend is unconstitutional—and thus being inflicted with the ultimate harm Plaintiffs allege (that is, being forced to litigate in an unconstitutional forum). By that time, Plaintiffs’ claims would be moot and their remedies foreclosed because the courts of appeals cannot enjoin a proceeding which has already occurred."

I’m willing to “bet the farm” that most people would agree that being forced to litigate in an unconstitutional forum is a harm that they should not be forced to endure.