Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Corporate CounselorFeaturesLabor LawLJN NewslettersRegulationWhistleblower Laws

The Scope of the Dodd-Frank's Whistleblower Protection

By Joseph M. McLaughlin and Yafit Cohn
May 02, 2017

As part of its comprehensive reform of the U.S. financial regulatory system, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 enhanced and expanded pre-existing protections and bounty incentives to encourage whistleblowing, including those contained in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). It did so by amending the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) to add a new provision, § 21F, titled “Securities Whistleblower Incentives and Protection.” This new section, however, left open a fundamental question that has engendered significant dispute: Is a corporate employee who reports an employer's possible violation of the securities laws to a supervisor or internal compliance officer — but not to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) — considered a “whistleblower” entitled to protection from retaliation under Dodd-Frank?

Courts that have considered this question have reached differing conclusions. Notably, the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Second and Fifth Circuits have split on this issue. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit, in Somers v. Digital Realty Trust, 850 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 2017), joined the Second Circuit in concluding that the protection from employment retaliation afforded by § 21F covers employees who report a suspected violation of the securities laws internally — not only those who report to the SEC.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.