Quote:
Originally Posted by Boomer
I am reading jdsupra.com regarding SEC v. Jarkesy and the June 27th decision that I can imagine has certain financial “advisor” types doing the dance of joy. That would be the ones who do not always have their clients’ best interests at heart, up to and including Madoffs in the Making. Is this decision throwing investors to the wolves?
(The source I am reading is JD Supra, defined as “a daily source of legal intelligence on all topics business and personal, distributing news commentary and analysis from leading lawyers and law firms.”)
It’s a fascinating and scary read.
Figuring out things like this is often like threading a needle, but this one raises enough concerns that I thought other investors might want to be aware to be more aware.
I am not trying to start a legal debate. Fwiw, I just wanted to stop by to say…….
Danger, Will Robinson……
Boomer
|
Bigger issues here for SCOTUS.
Subject matter experts have clearly demonstrated they are not superior. Getting a PhD does not make one superior to others. Often, they are inferior.
This case and the roll back of Chevron by SCOTUS are healthy for society overall. First, we don’t need government bureaucrats deciding the fate of people with legitimate claims. A jury of one’s peers is better because of fairness. Of course, along the way it will be not a good for some. Second, government bureaucrats are often corrupted by politics, etc. Surprise!