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.
9,167 Listeners
8,489 Listeners
8,638 Listeners
359 Listeners
30,662 Listeners
32,083 Listeners
6,269 Listeners
25,777 Listeners
110,602 Listeners
1,452 Listeners
10,132 Listeners
16,065 Listeners
15,410 Listeners
10 Listeners
13 Listeners