<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 11:32:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Rejects Investor Loss Requirement for SEC Disgorgement</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 11:32:18 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disgorgement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investor Loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Remedies and Penalties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=182863?d=20260730151238EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On June 4, 2026, the US Supreme Court held that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) need not prove that investors suffered actual financial loss to obtain disgorgement in a civil action. In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, Sripetch v. SEC, the Court reached this conclusion by relying on “traditional equitable principles,” [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Luke Cadigan, Tejal Shah, and Elizabeth Skey, Cooley LLP, on Friday, July 31, 2026 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="https://www.cooley.com/people/luke-cadigan">Luke Cadigan</a> is the Partner in Charge, Boston, and <a href="https://www.cooley.com/people/tejal-shah">Tejal Shah</a> and <a href="https://www.cooley.com/people/elizabeth-skey">Elizabeth Skey</a> are Partners at Cooley LLP. This post is based on their Cooley memorandum.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>On June 4, 2026, the US Supreme Court held that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) need not prove that investors suffered actual financial loss to obtain disgorgement in a civil action. In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, <em><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-466_5i26.pdf">Sripetch v. SEC</a></em>, the Court reached this conclusion by relying on “traditional equitable principles,” which “do not require a showing of pecuniary loss before a court may issue an award of unjust profits.”</p>
<p>This ruling creates uniformity nationwide on an issue that had split the circuits, with the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit previously holding that pecuniary loss was required to obtain disgorgement, and the First and Ninth Circuits holding it was not. The SEC’s ability to continue seeking disgorgement without showing pecuniary loss is meaningful, given the <a href="https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-34">SEC obtained orders for $10.8 billion</a> in disgorgement of ill-gotten gains and prejudgment interest in fiscal year 2025.<a class="footnote" id="1b" href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/#1">[1]</a></p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/#more-182863" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Supreme Court Rejects Investor Loss Requirement for SEC Disgorgement">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/07/31/supreme-court-rejects-investor-loss-requirement-for-sec-disgorgement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
