Sign Up

NCLA Site Search

Cases

SEC v. Novinger

CASE SUMMARY

In 2016, Christopher Novinger and SEC reached a settlement of the agency’s claims that he and his company, ICAN Investment Group, LLC, violated federal securities law. SEC required Mr. Novinger and ICAN to sign a consent order claiming that he had agreed to be bound forever by an “Gag Order”—an administrative tool meant to silence people with lifetime speech bans related to their prosecutions. For over 50 years under its 1972 Gag Rule, SEC has insisted that all people who settle cases with the agency must agree to a gag violating nearly every free speech doctrine.

NCLA’s client Mr. Novinger simply wants to speak candidly about SEC’s enforcement proceedings without facing the threat of a reopened prosecution. His Gag Order is broad, all-encompassing, fails to provide clear notice of what speech it forbids, and never expires. Perpetually mandating silence on such unclear terms that forbid Mr. Novinger to do what even convicted people have every right to do violates his due process rights.

The Gag Rule violates the First Amendment for several reasons: 1) it is a forbidden prior restraint on future speech; 2) it is a content-based restriction of speech; 3) it grants SEC unbridled enforcement discretion and silences Mr. Novinger in perpetuity; 4) it forbids truthful speech; 5) it unconstitutionally conditions settlement upon surrender of Americans’ inalienable rights of free speech; 6) it compels speech; and 7) it abridges Americans’ rights of petition long protected by the First Amendment. Any rule amassing such a long list of constitutional violations could never have been valid in the first place. 

SEC created this Rule without notice and comment, violating the Administrative Procedure Act and dishonestly calling it a “Housekeeping Rule.” Such rules cannot bind anyone outside the government, but SEC’s gag orders always bind outside parties. 

OUR TEAM

Kara Rollins
Litigation Counsel
Margaret A. Little
Senior Litigation Counsel
Kaitlyn Schiraldi
Staff Attorney

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS

Appellants' Reply Brief

November 3, 2023 | Read More

Appellants' Opening Brief

August 16, 2023 | Read More

Notice of Appeal

May 19, 2023 | Read More

Order of the U.S. District Court For the Northern District of Texas Fort Worth Division

March 22, 2023 | Read More

Notice of Post-Briefing Decision

October 28, 2022 | Read More

SEE 14 FILINGS
PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Asks Fifth Circuit to Approve Pathway to Challenge Unlawful SEC-Imposed Lifetime Speech Ban

August 16, 2023 | Read More

NCLA Seeks Declaratory Relief to End Christopher Novinger’s SEC-Imposed Lifetime Speech Ban

August 23, 2022 | Read More

NCLA Asks Fifth Circuit to End an SEC Lifetime Gag Order that Violates the First Amendment

December 16, 2021 | Read More

NCLA Lawsuit in Texas Seeks to End SEC’s Lifetime Gag Orders that Violate the First Amendment

June 17, 2021 | Read More

IN THE MEDIA

What is the SEC so afraid of?

February 9, 2024

SEC gag order challenger loses federal appeal (but theres a silver lining)

Reuters

February 7, 2023

CASE HIGHLIGHTS

RELATED CASES
  • Adir International v. Starr Indemnity and Liability Company

    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.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: California

    View Case
  • American Home Furnishings Alliance, et al. v. U.S. Consumer Product Safety 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.

    Case Closed - June 30, 2023

    Agencies: Consumer Product Safety Commission

    View Case
  • American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. Walther, Dir., and Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    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.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    View Case
  • American Hospital Association, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, et al.

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    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.

    Case Closed - June 15, 2022

    Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services

    View Case
  • 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
  • AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC and FTC v. Credit Bureau Center, LLC

    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.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Federal Trade Commission

    View Case

SHARE THIS CASE

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