Sign Up

NCLA Site Search

Amicus Briefs

Musk v. SEC

CASE SUMMARY

NCLA filed an amicus curiae brief urging the Supreme Court to grant Elon Musk’s cert petition and strike down SEC’s “Gag Rule” censoring every American with whom it settles a regulatory enforcement case. For over 50 years, SEC has forbidden all enforcement targets from even truthfully criticizing their cases in public.

SEC is limiting Mr. Musk’s future speech and ability to speak publicly without preclearance or criticize the agency as a condition of settlement. This is a quintessential instance of prior restraint, which the Supreme Court has called “the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” But SEC has no power to regulate the future speech of those with whom it settles! Musk’s case is emblematic of a much larger problem: imposing this restriction on all Americans who settle enforcement cases with SEC under its Gag Rule forces them to abandon their constitutional rights, a blatantly unconstitutional action. Supreme Court precedent forbids the government from conditioning anyone’s ability to receive a benefit on surrendering their constitutional rights.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided to uphold the SEC gag order imposed on Musk, concluding that he voluntarily waived his First Amendment rights, or should have negotiated a different agreement. That decision conflicts with First Amendment precedents set by at least four other circuit courts and the Second Circuit itself. SEC consistently admits that its gag orders are non-negotiable. Musk and thousands of others censored under the Gag Rule had no choice.

In April 2024, the Supreme Court denied Mr. Musk’s petition for a writ of certiorari in this case.

OUR TEAM

Mark Chenoweth
President and Chief Legal Officer
Kara Rollins
Litigation Counsel
Margaret A. Little
Senior Litigation Counsel

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS

Brief Amicus Curiae of the New Civil Liberties Alliance in Support of Petitioner

January 19, 2024 | Read More

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

December 7, 2023 | Read More

PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Amicus Brief Asks Supreme Court to End SEC Gags on Targets of Settled Enforcement Cases

January 19, 2024 | Read More

IN THE MEDIA

What is the SEC so afraid of?

February 9, 2024

RELATED CASES
  • American Securities Association and Citadel Securities LLC v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Unreasonable Searches

    The Fourth Amendment forbids warrantless searches and seizures of information, yet the Administrative State violates this right to privacy through administrative subpoenas and warrants, automated information collection devices, civil investigative demands, and “voluntary” requests for information.

    Conditions on Spending

    Administrative agencies use unconstitutional conditions on spending to regulate the conduct of grantees. Rather than rule through law, the government simply purchases submission.

    Case Active - February 15, 2024

    Agencies: Securities and Exchange Commission

    View Case
  • Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Closed - July 1, 2021

    Agencies: California Attorney General

    View Case
  • Mario Cerame, et al. v. Christopher L. Slack, in his official capacity as Connecticut Statewide Bar Counsel, et al.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Active - November 10, 2021

    Agencies: Connecticut Statewide Bar Counsel

    View Case
  • Mark Changizi, et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services, et al.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Closed - September 23, 2024

    Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services | Office of Surgeon General

    View Case
  • RMS of Georgia, LLC D/B/A Choice Refrigerants v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency

    View Case
  • RMS of Georgia, LLC D/B/A Choice Refrigerants v. Environmental Protection Agency and Michael S. Regan

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Active - September 14, 2023

    Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency

    View Case

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.