Sripetch v. SEC · ¶24

To decide this case, we need not resolve that dispute. The question we face is not whether Congress's recent amendments free the SEC from the traditional equitable rule that disgorgement must be “awarded for victims.” Liu, 591 U. S., at 79. The only question we took this case to resolve is whether the SEC must show that an investor suffered a pecuniary loss before it may secure a disgorgement remedy under either § 78u(d)(5) or § 78u(d)(7). And to answer that question, we can simply assume without deciding that disgorgement under § 78u(d)(7) remains an equitable remedy— so that it must comply with traditional equitable rules, including the rule that disgorgement must be awarded for victims. Even assuming all that to be true, we conclude that a showing of pecuniary loss is not required before an investor may qualify as a victim of an offender's wrongdoing entitled to compensation.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.