Restoring Due Process
ICAN is fighting for fundamental fairness in SEC proceedings, demanding transparent processes, reasonable timelines, and constitutional protections for all market participants.
Like so many other federal agencies, over the years, the SEC has behaved increasingly like a law unto itself, too often willing to ignore due process and fairness in its pursuit of wins. At the same time, everyday Americans seeking redress are forced to navigate a sprawling, Kafkaesque bureaucracy where appeals can languish for years. SEC “forever bars” have become alarmingly common as SEC bureaucratic delays and inaction have turned the right to apply for reinstatement, which is included in many forced settlements, into an illusory promise. It is a pattern that ICAN will no longer allow to continue unchallenged.
Through our targeted litigation strategy and advocacy, ICAN is holding the SEC accountable to the core American values of justice, fairness, and due process - principles that are essential for robust capital markets.
Our Work
Litigation
SEC v Rose
The SEC is in federal court asking a judge to enforce a nearly $450,000 order against a retired Texas grandfather — while leaving out the constitutional violations it has committed, the Supreme Court rulings it has ignored, and the fact that it's already been garnishing his Social Security. ICAN filed an opposition to set the record straight.
Lucia v SEC
Ray Lucia's story serves as a stark reminder of what's at stake when regulatory agencies can destroy careers using unconstitutional processes. His 13-year ordeal illustrates the coercive nature of SEC administrative proceedings, which the Supreme Court has now repeatedly criticized—thanks in large part to Ray’s willingness to fight, which paved the way for others to do the same. ICAN is proud to be representing Raymond Lucia in his motion to lift a “forever bar” imposed against him by the SEC.
Due Process Tax
The SEC pursued $8,826 in prejudgment interest from relief defendant Jamie Quick, who was never accused of any wrongdoing, effectively imposing a "due process tax" for exercising her right to defend herself in court.
Spitzer v SEC
After 40 years of faithful client service, 74-year-old Paul Spitzer faces financial ruin after the SEC's 18-month silence transformed a limited supervisory settlement into a de facto lifetime industry bar through administrative inaction.
Eric Cannon: SEC Administrative Proceeding
After pursuing Eric Cannon in federal court for nine years over non-fraud registration violations, the SEC initiated a follow-on administrative proceeding seeking to permanently bar him from the financial industry—a "double jeopardy" that threatens his 30-year career despite no allegations of fraud or investor harm.
Amicus Briefs & Comment Letters
Goldata Computer Services, Inc. v. Department of Banking and Securities, No. 28 EAP 2026 (Pa., August 18, 2026)
Arguing that Pennsylvania's constitutional jury guarantee turns on the remedy sought, not a cause-of-action label—and that the right applies most forcefully where the agency imposing a punitive penalty is the same body that pockets it.
Powell v. SEC, No. 25-1100 (U.S., April 20th, 2026)
Brief signed by 12 former SEC enforcement officials asks the Supreme Court to review the SEC's so-called "Gag Rule"—the fifty-year-old policy that forces anyone who settles with the agency to agree, for the rest of their life, never to publicly deny the SEC's allegations against them.
