Securities Regulation -- 2013



National Association of Manufacturers v. SEC   (D.C. Circuit)

Challenging law and SEC rule on Conflict Minerals

The NAM filed its main brief on January 2013, in its court challenge to the conflict minerals rule issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in August 2012. The final rule imposes an unworkable, overly broad and burdensome system that will undermine jobs and growth and may not achieve Congress’s overall objectives. Our brief asked a federal appeals court to modify or set aside the rule, arguing that the SEC adopted one of the costliest rules in its history while rejecting alternative regulatory options that would have substantially reduced the costs. The SEC also misread the statute and imposed new burdens not required by Congress on far more companies than expected. The business community understands the seriousness of the conflict occurring in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the need to implement solutions to bring an end to the violence. However, while well intentioned, the SEC’s final rule goes too far, and business groups have suggested constructive ways to make the rule more workable.

Oral arguments, originally scheduled for May before Judges Henderson, Tatel and Griffith, were canceled. A D.C. Circuit decision on April 26, 2013 in American Petroleum Institute v. SEC held that the D.C. Circuit lacked jurisdiction over a petition for review quite similar to the one filed in this case, and that the case should first be heard by a federal district court. In light of this development, we moved to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and the D.C. Circuit agreed.. For details on proceedings in the district court, click here.


Related Documents:
NAM Motion to Transfer  (April 30, 2013)
NAM Reply brief  (March 22, 2013)
NAM Opening brief  (January 16, 2013)
NAM Motion to Expedite  (November 21, 2012)
NAM Statement of Issues  (November 21, 2012)
NAM Amended Petition for Review  (October 22, 2012)