Cases

Romeril v. SEC

CASE SUMMARY

Did we achieve our litigation objective? No, Barry Romeril was forced to abide by the SEC’s oppressive “gag rule” that prevents him from discussing his settlement or even proclaiming his innocence.

Court Outcome: The U.S. Supreme Court chose not to review the Second Circuit’s decision.

Larger Impact: This is one of many cases NCLA has brought to challenge the oppressive “gag” policy by which the SEC forces victims of its administrative enforcement actions to give up their First Amendment rights as a condition of settling their case. NCLA will keep pushing the SEC to abandon the gag rule.

Summary: When Barry D. Romeril settled with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in June of 2003 he didn’t know he would live to regret it 16 years later. That is because in order to settle his case, the SEC required that he agree to be bound by a Gag Order- a little known tool of the SEC meant to silence people for life regarding cases brought against them. NCLA moved to remove the gag order from his consent agreement, declaring it an unconstitutional prior restraint and content-based restriction on speech, abridging freedom of the press and Americans’ right to petition. In October of 2018, NCLA pioneered the legal challenges to this rule by petitioning the SEC to amend its gag rule, setting forth in detail the numerous constitutional and legal infirmities of this unconstitutional and disturbing practice.

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS
PRESS RELEASES
IN THE MEDIA

RELATED CASES

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.