Citing a similar judicial review underway over the constitutionality of country-of-origin meat labeling rules, the Securities and Exchange Commission has petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for yet another judicial hearing to settle the lingering question of whether certain conflict minerals disclosures are constitutional. The latest legal gambit comes as conflict minerals forms and reports make their way to the SEC’s EDGAR database to meet a June 2 deadline.
The Dodd-Frank Act directed the SEC to require public companies to assess their supply chains for the use tantalum, tin, gold, and tungsten that may benefit violent militia groups in the Congo. In April, the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit found a requirement that companies reveal not just their supply chain due diligence, but whether or not their products are “conflict free” was a violation of free speech protections. That decision, which upheld the rest of the rule, settled a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable, and National Association of Manufacturers. As part of the decision, the case was remanded back to the district court for a more in-depth evaluation of constitutional issues. That review, and a separate case that may influence the decision
