Second Circuit Ruling on Personal Benefit Test Widens Scope of Criminal Insider Trading

The holding in Blaszczak significantly widens the scope of criminal insider trading. It also creates the anomaly of extending the criminal law beyond the SEC's civil enforcement authority.

12 minute read January 01, 2021 at 12:05 AM
By
Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
Second Circuit Ruling on Personal Benefit Test Widens Scope of Criminal Insider Trading

A Second Circuit panel's decision in 2019 in United States v. Blaszczak, 947 F.3d 19 (2d Cir. 2019), held that a government agency's confidential information can constitute "property" for purposes of federal criminal fraud statutes.

This premium content is locked for Business Crimes Bulletin subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN Business Crimes Bulletin

  • 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

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Most firms are aiming their newest tools at the work they already do — pouring their most powerful technology into running the same tasks a little faster. But when everyone automates the same tasks at once, no one pulls ahead. That reaches the future a little faster while leaving a firm’s largest opportunity untouched — and that opportunity isn’t doing more of the existing work, but transforming how the high-value work gets done.

June 01, 2026

Artificial intelligence is rapidly embedding itself into legal workflows, but much of the conversation treats all use cases as if they carry the same level of risk, even if they do not. The more useful question is not whether AI works, but where it can be safely applied and where it cannot.

June 01, 2026