Legal entity
All 1 tracked stories fall under one category: court-decisions. Of the tracked stories, 1 of 1 also mention Justice Clarence Thomas, the most common co-covered peer. We currently track 1 Legal story that mention Section 21(d)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, all published on June 13, 2026.
Last mentioned: Jun 13, 2026
Entity pulse
Figures are computed live from our source-verified story record — see our methodology for how impact and sentiment are derived.
All 1 tracked stories fall under one category: court-decisions. Of the tracked stories, 1 of 1 also mention Justice Clarence Thomas, the most common co-covered peer. We currently track 1 Legal story that mention Section 21(d)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, all published on June 13, 2026. Each carries 2 original sources on average.
Computed from the 1 stories linked to this entity, with beat comparisons drawn from all 7 Legal stories published in the same date window. Shares are omitted below five stories and comparisons below a twenty-story baseline.
Coverage cohort
Other entities that clear the same relevance threshold in stories also covering Section 21(d)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Shared-story counts are live from our verified record — not editorial picks.
Sripetch v. SEC Decided
Supreme Court unanimously holds that the SEC need not prove investors suffered a pecuniary loss to obtain disgorgement, resolving a circuit split.
Section 21(d)(7) Enacted
Congress adds express SEC disgorgement authority to the Exchange Act, separate from its general equitable powers.
Liu v. SEC
Supreme Court rules disgorgement is a permissible equitable remedy if it does not exceed a wrongdoer’s net profits and is awarded for victims.
Kokesh v. SEC
Supreme Court holds that disgorgement in SEC enforcement actions constitutes a 'penalty' subject to the 5‑year statute of limitations.
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Sripetch v. SEC holds that the SEC may obtain disgorgement of ill-gotten gains without proving pecuniary loss, resolving a circuit split and providing clarity on the scope of equitable remedies, while Justice Thomas’s concurrence raises new constitutional questions.
Source: National Law Review · National Law Review
Section 21(d)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is linked from 1 story on this site, each scored at or above our 35% relevance threshold — see how these pages are built.
See something wrong on this page — a misattributed entity, a wrong stat, a broken source link? Report a data issue.
