Challenge to SEC’s Bank Secrecy Act authority backed by ex-FinCEN leadership
By 
Kyle Brasseur2021-08-24T15:21:00
A brokerage firm petitioning the Supreme Court to review the power of the SEC to enforce the Bank Secrecy Act has received support from two former officials of the primary agency tasked with overseeing the AML law.
Related articles
-
ArticleSupreme Court declines challenge to SEC’s Bank Secrecy Act authority
The Supreme Court turned down a bid by brokerage firm Alpine Securities Corp. petitioning for review of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s power to enforce the Bank Secrecy Act.
-
ArticleCrypto platform BitMEX to pay $100M for registration, AML violations
Cryptocurrency platform BitMEX has agreed to pay $100 million as part of a settlement with the CFTC and FinCEN for multiple violations of the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering laws.
-
ArticleFinCEN puts financial institutions on notice with first AML/CFT priorities
The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network tipped its hand at changes ahead for the Bank Secrecy Act in announcing the first government-wide list of priorities for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism.
More from Regulatory Enforcement
-
News BriefCFPB ends probe into Meta’s financial advertising practices
Meta says it is no longer under investigation by the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the latest instance of the agency scaling back enforcement under President Donald Trump.
-
News BriefTexas sues Johnson & Johnson, Kenvue over alleged misleading marketing of Tylenol
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued two pharmaceutical companies for ”deceptively marketing Tylenol to pregnant mothers” despite risks linked to autism. The filing came two days before HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared to walk back the claims.
-
News BriefCFPB scraps bad-actor registry, citing cost-benefit issues
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau shut down a registry of non-bank financial firms that broke consumer laws. The agency cites the costs being ”not justified by the speculative and unquantified benefits to consumers.”