Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Keeping Up With Shifting SEC Priorities

By Courtney Quirós and Carissa Lavin
September 30, 2025

The first half of 2025 brought seismic shifts in leadership, structure, procedures and priorities at the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the appointment of the new Chairman, Paul S. Atkins, and new Director of the Division of Enforcement, Judge Margaret Ryan; reorganization under new deputy enforcement directors for three newly created regions; a 15% reduction in workforce; elimination of the delegation of authority that empowered the SEC’s enforcement staff to issue subpoenas in investigations; and a “major course correction” related to the SEC’s regulatory priorities, to name a few. Many attribute these developments to the SEC’s effort to align with the Trump Administration’s policy initiatives and objectives. Take, for example, the SEC’s withdrawal of 14 major rule proposals issued by the previous Administration. The abandoned rules included proposals that would have increased disclosure requirements related to ESG-related investments, required funds to tighten up their cybersecurity risk management practices, and placed additional guardrails on the treatment of customer cryptocurrency assets — hardly priorities of the current Administration. The SEC has characterized this sea change as a return to the SEC’s “roots of promoting, rather than stifling, innovation.”

Last month, federal regulators, including the SEC, revealed their new rulemaking agendas. Commission Chairman Atkins touted the effort, saying the regulatory agenda “reflects that it is a new day” given the SEC’s “renewed focus on supporting innovation, capital formation, market efficiency, and investor protection.” Highlights from the new agenda include new rule proposals for the offer and sale of crypto assets meant to clarify the regulatory framework for those assets, a number of proposed deregulatory rules intended to reduce compliance and disclosure burdens and facilitate capital formation, and withdrawal of items introduced during the prior Administration that the current SEC deemed incongruent with its goal that regulation be “smart, effective, and appropriately tailored” to the SEC’s statutory authority.

This premium content is locked for Business Crimes Bulletin 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.