SAN FRANCISCO A handsome, golden-colored therapy bunny named Alex came to the ballpark and stole the hearts of San Francisco Giants fans Thursday night, att
Supreme Court Ruling Will Hurt FTC’s Ability to Fight for Consumers
Supreme Court Ruling Will Hurt FTC’s Ability to Fight for Consumers
A unanimous ruling will leave the federal agency less able to deliver cash relief to consumers duped by companies.
Photo by EugeneEdge / Shutterstock.com
A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruling will weaken the power of the Federal Trade Commission to force companies that dupe consumers into delivering cash relief to the injured parties.
A provision of the Federal Trade Commission Act frequently has been used as a way for the FTC to obtain monetary relief in the wake of violations of the law.
Supreme Court cuts back FTC power to recover ill-gotten gains
Case involved Leawood fraudster Scott Tucker
(Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
Susan Walsh/AP
Federal Trade Commission commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter testifies during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 8, 2019, regarding consumer protection on data privacy.
and last updated 2021-04-22 22:01:28-04
WASHINGTON â A unanimous Supreme Court on Thursday cut back the Federal Trade Commission s authority to recover ill-gotten gains, overturning a nearly $1.3 billion award against a professional race car driver who was convicted of cheating consumers through his payday loan businesses.
Podcast
Share us on: Law360 (April 22, 2021, 9:09 PM EDT) With the stroke of a pen, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday nixed a legal strategy that the Federal Trade Commission had used for many years to return billions of dollars to consumers. Law360 s The Term dissects the ruling, along with analyzing a big defeat for juvenile justice reformers and Justice Amy Coney Barrett s eye-popping book deal.
This Week
Billion-Dollar Weapon
Each week on
The Term, Supreme Court reporter Jimmy Hoover and co-host Natalie Rodriguez break down all the high court action.
This week starts with a look at Justice Barrett s reported $2 million book deal with an imprint of Penguin Random House, which will apparently focus on how judges should not be influenced by their personal views. The hosts examine the ethical implications of the news and how it stacks up against the book deals of other high court authors.
The U.S. Supreme Court issued, on 22 April 2021, its ruling in the matter of
AMG Capital Management LLC v FTC where they held unanimously that Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act ( the FTC Act ) does not authorise the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) to see, or a court to award, equitable monetary relief, such as restitution or disgorgement. In particular, the case involved a business owner who was sued under Section 5 of the FTC Act for unfair or deceptive acts or practices. In this regard, the FTC sought a permanent injunction under Section 13(b) as well as restitution and disgorgement of the business owner s monetary gains.