'Salman': Addressing Vagueness In Insider Trading Law
January 5, 2017 | New York Law Journal
The Supreme Court's highly anticipated decision in Salman v. United States proved to be anticlimactic. It essentially restated the law of tipper/tippee liability set out in Dirks v. SEC. In one area, however, the Court broke new ground – its discussion of the persistent charge that judicially fashioned insider trading law is too vague to satisfy the requirements of due process. In our latest article, we describe the vagueness arguments made in Salman, explain the Supreme Court's grounds for rejecting these arguments, and suggest potential limitations to the Court's vagueness analysis.
Download File (pdf | 265.39 KB)