Securities Enforcement. Investigations. Regulation.
Independent analysis of the laws, regulations, investigations, and enforcement actions shaping modern financial markets.
BRAEDEN ANDERSON
RECOGNITION AND LEADERSHIP
Braeden is one of the top securities lawyers in the country and was recognized by Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America in the Financial Services Regulation Law and Securities Regulation categories. This honor is awarded to only the top 2% of attorneys in the United States and is based on a comprehensive peer-review survey.
Braeden helped lead Gesmer Updegrove to recognition in The Legal 500 United States for Corporate Investigations & White Collar Crime, Tier 3, and Finance: Fintech, Tier 4.
Braeden is active in the U.S. securities enforcement community through Securities Docket, where he has served on the 2025 and 2026 Advisory Boards and contributed video commentary through the Weekly Update.
Braeden was named the #1 United States author in FinTech in Mondaq’s Spring 2025 Thought Leadership Awards, reflecting the national reach and influence of his writing on fintech, securities regulation, and digital asset policy.
Supreme Court Holds That Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act Does Not Create a Private Right of Action
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in FS Credit Opportunities Corp. v. Saba Capital Master Fund, Ltd. marks a significant development in securities and investment management law. The Court held that Section 47(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 does not create an implied private right of action, meaning private plaintiffs cannot sue solely under that provision to challenge alleged violations of the Act. The decision reinforces the Court’s modern yet conservative approach to implied rights of action, emphasizing that Congress, not the courts, determines who may enforce federal law. The ruling has important implications for closed-end funds, activist investors, investment advisers, fund boards, and litigants seeking to rely on remedial provisions in federal regulatory statutes.
SEC Proposes to Rescind Regulation NMS Rules 611 and 610(e)
The SEC is proposing to rescind Rule 611 of Regulation NMS, which generally prohibits trade-throughs of protected quotations in NMS stocks, and Rule 610(e), which requires exchanges and national securities associations to maintain rules designed to prevent members from displaying quotations that lock or cross protected quotations.
In plain English, the SEC is proposing to remove two foundational rules that have helped define how U.S. equity orders are routed, executed, and displayed across trading venues for the past twenty years.
Commissioner Peirce’s Farewell Remarks Underscore a Central Constraint on SEC Authority
Commissioner Hester M. Peirce’s June 9, 2026 farewell remarks at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Capital Markets Summit offer a concise statement of administrative-law discipline for the SEC. Her remarks underscore a defining theme of her tenure: the Commission’s authority is substantial, but bounded by statute and the Constitution. This analysis considers Commissioner Peirce’s views on SEC authority, capital markets, digital-asset regulation, custody, investor protection, enforcement, disclosure, and the importance of lawful regulatory restraint.
CFTC Proposes Framework for Reviewing Event Contracts Tied to Gaming, Sports, and Other Enumerated Activities
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has proposed a new framework for reviewing event contracts, including sports-related prediction markets, under Section 5c(c)(5)(C) of the Commodity Exchange Act. The proposal would establish a structured process for determining whether contracts involving gaming, terrorism, war, assassination, or unlawful activities are contrary to the public interest. The rulemaking represents the latest step in the CFTC’s effort to balance innovation in prediction markets with its statutory mandate to protect market integrity.
SEC Warns Investment Advisers: Economic Conflicts Remain a Major Examination Priority
The SEC’s latest Risk Alert sends a clear message to investment advisers: economic conflicts of interest remain a core examination priority, and many firms continue to struggle with how those conflicts are disclosed, monitored, and managed.