In AMG, SCOTUS ruled that Sec. 13(b) of the FTC Act does not give the FTC authority to seek equitable monetary relief (e.g. restitution or disgorgement). After reviewing AMG’s history and SCOTUS’s analysis, we discuss the reasons for the FTC’s infrequent use of administrative hearings, AMG’s implications for pending and settled cases, the FTC’s current authority to seek civil money penalties, efforts to amend the FTC Act, and the FTC’s approach to new cases, including potential partnering with state AGs, the CFPB, and plaintiff’s attorneys. Ballard Spahr Senior Counsel Alan Kaplinsky hosts the conversation.
View all episodes
By Ballard Spahr LLP
4.9
4545 ratings
In AMG, SCOTUS ruled that Sec. 13(b) of the FTC Act does not give the FTC authority to seek equitable monetary relief (e.g. restitution or disgorgement). After reviewing AMG’s history and SCOTUS’s analysis, we discuss the reasons for the FTC’s infrequent use of administrative hearings, AMG’s implications for pending and settled cases, the FTC’s current authority to seek civil money penalties, efforts to amend the FTC Act, and the FTC’s approach to new cases, including potential partnering with state AGs, the CFPB, and plaintiff’s attorneys. Ballard Spahr Senior Counsel Alan Kaplinsky hosts the conversation.
32,147 Listeners
30,649 Listeners
25,875 Listeners
8,752 Listeners
9,179 Listeners
8,476 Listeners
372 Listeners
6,296 Listeners
112,617 Listeners
1,451 Listeners
10,240 Listeners
16,246 Listeners
16,081 Listeners
10 Listeners
13 Listeners