The Texas Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act has been around since 2009, but it has been making headlines recently due to a $1.4 billion settlement between Meta Platforms and the Texas attorney general. Companies concerned about potential liability under CUBI should undertake a comprehensive review of what data they collect to ensure that they are treating biometric identifiers properly.
Dallas Lawyer Obtains DOJ Case Closure for Armenian Businessmen
Armenian brothers Artyom Khachatryan and Gurgen Khachatryan faced accusations that their multimillion-dollar Beverly Hills mansion was purchased with bribes. Following a two-year investigation, the government announced it had closed the case and reached a settlement with the family to share proceeds from the sale of the luxury estate. The resolution is touted as a significant victory by the brothers’ Dallas lawyer, Ephraim “Fry” Wernick.
Texas AG Signals Plans to Aggressively Enforce Texas’ New Data Privacy & Security Act
The Texas Data Privacy & Security Act became effective July 1. Along with 17 other states, Texas has now enacted data privacy protections that will require many businesses to comply with new regulations about the collection, use, processing and treatment of personal data. Businesses that operate in Texas should be aware of, and prepared to comply with, the TDPSA immediately. Companies should coordinate with their technology and legal teams to review policies and procedures and ensure their privacy policy, terms and conditions, and other documentation comply with the Texas law and other applicable privacy and cybersecurity regulations to ensure compliance and avoid enforcement actions by the Texas attorney general.
The SEC’s Evolving Enforcement Authority: From Courtroom to Administrative Proceedings
For more than a decade, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has been able to bring enforcement actions in either federal court or the agency’s internal venue. Not anymore. The U.S. Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in SEC v. Jarkesy significantly curtailing the SEC’s ability to use its administrative proceedings to impose civil penalties for securities fraud. Instead, these cases must be tried in federal district court, where a defendant’s Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial is available. This decision not only alters the landscape for securities fraud enforcement but also signals potential broader implications for the enforcement powers of federal agencies across the government.
Coupled with a series of other recent rulings by the Court, this verdict adds to a body of law with potentially far-reaching implications for the enforcement powers of all federal agencies.
Texas Experts: SCOTUS’ Jarkesy Decision to Have Limited Impact on SEC Enforcement
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Thursday that defendants in fraud cases have the right to a civil jury trial in cases in which the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission seeks financial penalties appears to be broad and sweeping but may have only minimal impact on SEC enforcement actions. But legal experts say that the decision could have a significant impact on settlements with the SEC. The SEC’s case against George Jarkesy, a Texas hedge fund manager and conservative radio talk show host, dates back to 2013 when the government claims that Jarkesy defrauded investors by falsely leading them to believe that KPMG was auditing two funds he launched. The SEC brought their case in an administrative proceeding before an SEC-appointed ALJ. The SEC hit Jarkesy and a co-defendant with $300,000 in penalties and ordered Jarkesy’s fund, Patriot28, to disgorge about $685,000 in ill-gotten gains.
Also, click here to see the list of Fifth Circuit cases handled by the Supreme Court this term.