Podcasts, Newsletters, and More

In the past several days, ICAN was at the U.S. Supreme Court for oral arguments in SEC v. Sripetch. We saw one of our own clients' cases—J.D. Jordan's—dismissed on the eve of those arguments. We filed a new amicus brief in Powell v. SEC challenging the SEC's decades-old "Gag Rule." And we saw FINRA formally adopt the reforms to the Pattern Day Trader rule that ICAN had publicly pushed for, with our comment letter cited in the SEC's approval order.

What is this costing the rest of us? The SEC is a federal agency funded by American taxpayers, created to protect investors and maintain the integrity of our markets. Cases like these are not that. There are years of agency resources, attorney hours, and taxpayer dollars spent pursuing individuals for technical violations—without fraud, without victims—that erode the confidence in participating in our markets. When financial professionals become familiar with how the SEC

Why are we fighting so hard on this issue? Because our clients aren't Wall Street insiders. They're everyday Americans trying to solve hard problems and to clear a path for others to do the same.

It is worth noting that our Barry case, and our amicus brief, were cited by SCOTUSblog as presenting an even more compelling version of the issue at stake in Sripetch, one that could “amplify the court’s skepticism toward the expanding scope of disgorgement.”

But we are deeply concerned about what it means for cases where the SEC has gone even further—seeking the same punishment in cases with no fraud at all. This is why ICAN is fighting to bring forward the cases—and the people—that show how damaging this practice has become.

Rather than accept those limits, the SEC has spent the past several years testing their boundaries, exploiting divisions among the courts, and deepening uncertainty for individuals and small businesses. ICAN’s long-term strategy—combining direct litigation, appeals, and targeted amicus advocacy—has now brought that unresolved conflict to the Court’s doorstep

Hundreds of cases initiated one, five, or even ten years ago are still working their way through the courts, often carrying with them the threat of new precedents that, if left unchallenged, could cement past expansionary efforts and pave the way for future overreach.

The notion that the SEC staff has pulled back from aggressive enforcement is widely mischaracterized, and SEC v. Barry is a clear example of what is really happening unless we step in. For more than a decade, the agency has devoted extraordinary resources to pursuing these individual salespeople (destroying their lives and careers along the way) who had no reason to believe they were doing anything wrong. Their employer had received legal advice—based on binding precedent—tha

By challenging the accredited investor rule on constitutional grounds, we are not just asking for a policy fix—we are seeking to establish guardrails that ensure regulators can never again impose arbitrary wealth and income tests that strip most Americans of equal access to economic opportunity.

Now we are helping Ray fight one more SEC injustice: a professional bar that only ends when the SEC says it does, even though his “right to apply for reentry” began seven years ago. The SEC’s process for lifting bars is full of Catch-22 requirements, procedural traps for the unwary, and other impediments that make the right to apply for reentry “illusory” in the words of one former SEC Commissioner. We are fighting to change that.

We’re pleased to bring you the latest updates in this issue, including new developments in our ongoing construction of a legal bulwark against SEC overreach—and a critical look at H.R. 3394, a bill that threatens to take a major step backward in expanding access to America’s capital markets.

Behind the Headlines: Why the SEC's Retreat Isn't the Reform You Think It Is

Update: Supreme Court Petition Filed & Entrex Shareholders Win Against FINRA

Rapid Results: ICAN's Strategic Approach Puts Regulatory Agencies on Notice

WSJ Feature, Senior Leadership Expansion & Congressional Action

Litigation Updates: ICAN Wins Continue Building Legal Guardrails to Restrain SEC Overreach

A Promising Start to 2025:Setting the Stage for Meaningful SEC Reform

Informed by the experience and expertise of ICAN’s staff and the nationwide ICAN Legal Network, the ICAN 2025 Action Plan is a comprehensive

Our Milestone Year: Driving SEC Reform & Offering Relief to Those Impacted by SEC Overreach

ICAN advances its mission on two fronts with a compelling Ninth Circuit Court appearance in SEC v Barry et al. and files a formal challenge