At least in the case of the SEC, the outgoing majority shows no inclination to exit gracefully. Yesterday, the , and today, the majority approved a big spend for the . One can reasonably guess that the agency will not comply with the document production request before the Chair leaves office.  

Perhaps Treasury should have published these findings before the election.          

With just over a month to go in the term of Chair Gensler, it is disappointing that the Democratic majority continues to push the adoption of new regulatory requirements over the dissents of the two Republican Commissioners (who will soon be in the majority). There is no great political victory here; no historic "achievement" to be touted. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to allow the incoming majority to pursue a rule change that incorporates their concerns? This just seems ungracious.…

This is a case worth reading.  

Leaving aside the specific disclosure that was at issue—a very important aspect of the decision that could have relevance to other rules recently adopted by the SEC—a majority of the Court rejected the view that securities regulators could "require disclosure for disclosure's sake." That is, the majority held that a disclosure requirement could not be imposed unless the SEC can "establish the rule has some connectional to an actual, enumerated…