FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. · ¶83

The Committees also anticipated and responded directly to the majority’s headlining structural argument. The majority reasons that Congress could not have meant to include an implied private right of action for rescission because “the Securities and Exchange Commission bears primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with the ICA.” Ante, at 6–7. But the Committee Reports explained that, “[w]ith a relatively small staff charged with administrative responsibility for policing potentially unlawful securities-related activities, the Commission [could not] be expected to bring actions against even a large portion of those engaged in schemes, devices and activities that are prohibited by federal law.” S. Rep. No. 96–958, at 14; H. R. Rep. No. 96–1341, at 28. So, “private lawsuits serve as an added deterrent to conduct made unlawful by Congress, without the necessity of governmental…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.