Document: 467 U.S. 735 104 S.Ct. 2720 81 L.Ed.2d 615 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, et al., Petitionersv.JERRY T. O'BRIEN, INC., al. No. 83-751. Supreme Court of the United States Argued April 17, 1984. Decided June 18, Syllabus During its nonpublic investigation into possible violations federal securities laws involving respondents, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued subpoenas to certain respondents for production financial records. Ultimately, filed suit in Federal District enjoin SEC's prevent compliance with some subpoenas. After dismissed claims injunctive relief, SEC third parties. Respondents then renewed their requests relief sought notice third-party The court denied requested but Appeals reversed respect Court's denial respondents' request Held: is not required notify "targets" investigations when issues has discretion determine such would be appropriate it not. Pp. 741-751. (a) Notice by any constitutional provision. When a administrative agency, without notifying person under investigation, uses subpoena power gather evidence adverse him, Due Process Clause Fifth Amendment implicated because an adjudicates no legal rights, Confrontation Sixth offended since does come play until initiation criminal proceedings. Nor may inculpated materials party seek shelter Self-Incrimination Amendment, "compel" anyone other than whom directed witness against himself. Finally, cannot contend that parties necessary enable "target" search or seizure his papers violative Fourth Amendment; communicates information party, even on understanding communication confidential, he object if conveys records thereof law enforcement authorities. 742-743. (b) language structure statutes administered SEC, particularly Act 1933 1934, do support imposition duty party. provisions vesting conduct issue are expansive, provision expressly obliges Congress intended vest considerable determining how investigate statutory violations, there expected adopt particular procedure from fact recently imposed carefully limited obligation Right Financial Privacy bank customers banks reinforces conclusion assumed was subject general whenever 743-747. (c) requirement justified ground, asserted substantive right insist meet standards set forth v. Powell, 379 48, 85 248, 13 112, that, enforce this intervening actions recipients restraining recipients' voluntary compliance, must notified Even assuming, arguendo, procedural pragmatic considerations counsel reinforcing those rights requirement. Administration highly burdensome both courts, regard identification persons organizations should considered investigations. Moreover, substantially increase ability who have something hide impede legitimate discouraging complying, destroying altering documents, intimidating witnesses, transferring funds so they could reached Government. 747-751. 704 F.2d 1065 (CA9) remanded. Kenneth S. Geller, Washington, D.C., petitioners. William D. Symmes, Spokane, Wash., respondents. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 (SEC Commission) authority and, course thereof, obtain relevant information. question before us whether 2 * This case represents one shard prolonged affairs respondent Harry F. Magnuson firms dealt. began 1980, Commission's staff reported possession tended show others had been trading stock specified mining companies manner registration, reporting, antifraud 1934. In response, Formal Order Investigation1 authorizing employees Seattle Regional Office initiate "private investigation" transactions necessary, testimony documents "deemed material inquiry." Complaint, Exhibit A, pp. 3-4. 3 Acting authority, members subpoenaed Jerry O'Brien, Inc. (O'Brien), broker-dealer firm, Pennaluna & Co. (Pennaluna). O'Brien voluntarily complied, refused disgorge materials. Soon thereafter, response several inquiries O'Brien's counsel, member informed "subject" investigation. 4 Pennaluna, respective owners2 promptly Eastern seeking complying him.3 cross-claim, also block portions motions depose officers expedited discovery files.4 5 soon thereafter relief. C-81-546 (ED Jan. 20, 1982). principal ground court's decision full opportunity assert objections basis scope instituted action. did, however, rule outstanding subpoenas5 met requirements outlined 112 (1964), summons judicially enforceable. Specifically, held purpose issuing subpoenas, already possession, issuance comported pertinent requirements. 6 Following decision, accompanying motion, pursuant Rule 62(c) Rules Civil Procedure, stay pending appeal. For first time, Reasoning lacked standing challenge parties, subsequent proceeding brought move suppress obtained through abusive Mar. 25, 1982).6 7 A panel Ninth Circuit affirmed at themselves, agreeing lower adequate remedy challenging subpoenas.7 1065, 1066-1067 (1983). However, Appeals' view, "have investigated consistently Powell standards." Id., 1068. To targets right, others. 1069. 8 rehearing rejected suggestion en banc. 719 300 Judge Kennedy, joined four judges, dissented rejection, arguing unprecedented threatened agencies law. Ibid. 9 We granted certiorari importance presented. 464 1038, 697, 79 163 (1984). now reverse. II 10 vested broad demand E.g., 15 U.S.C. §§ 77s(b), 78u(a), (b).8 Subpoenas self-enforcing, penalty refusal obey. But authorized bring compel process. 77v(b), 78u(c).9 11 No complex governing investigative If Commission, therefore, derived three sources: provision; part Congress, inferable laws, regarding inquiries; judicial enunciated progeny. Examination these potential bases ruling leaves unpersuaded fashioned warranted. A. 12 Our prior cases foreclose argument might make defense judgment below. Hannah Larche, 363 420, 80 1502, 1307 (1960), doubt neither nor him. circumstances id., 440-443, S.Ct., 1513-1515, proceedings, 440, n. 16, 1513, 16. These principles plainly cover inquiry laws. It settled Amendment. rationale doctrine Constitution proscribes only compelled self-incrimination, whatever pressures exerted upon directed,10 surely else Fisher States, 425 391, 397, 96 1569, 1574, 48 39 (1976); Couch 409 322, 328-329, 93 611, 615-616, 34 548 (1973). clearly can derivative subpoena. 14 invoke decision. established Miller, 435, 443, 1619, 1624, 71 (1976). Relying principle, customer grounds admission prosecution Government allegedly defective despite given 5, 5.11 See Donaldson 400 517, 522, 91 534, 538, 27 580 (1971) (Internal Revenue trench interests protected Amendment).12 rulings disable allow target unconstitutional papers. B afford greater aid. expansive. example, § 19(b) 1933, Stat. 85-86, empowers "which, proper enforcement" "require books, papers, which deems 77s(b). Similarly, 21(a) 21(b) 899, 900, authorize "make as violated, violating, about violate chapter [or] rules regulations thereunder" see "the (b).13 16 More generally, "power implement [their] provisions. . ." 77s(a), 78w(a)(1). promulgated variety investigations, provides "[u]nless otherwise ordered all formal proceedings shall non-public." 17 CFR 203.5 words, formally adopted policy routinely informing anyone, including targets, existence progress investigations.14 our knowledge, never questioned exercise power. And, another context, we rulemaking comparable enjoyed enough empower agency "establish publicly private." FCC Schreiber, 381 279, 292, 1459, 1468, 383 (1965). appears, short, Commission. discern wished procedures 18 inference give effect congressional intent reinforced special directly affected 1978, supra,15 enacted Act, 92 3697, 3401 seq. That statute accords similar institutions banks. most salient feature narrow entitlements creates. Thus, limits kinds applies, 3401(4), (5), types protect, 3401(2). customer's cabined strict claim within short period 3410(a), appeal determination completed 3410(d). Perhaps importantly, drafted fashion minimizes risk customers' will delay frustrate presented seven days Government's 3410(b), limitations tolled while pending, 3419. Since constraints Act. Pub.L. 96-433, 3, 94 1855, 78u(h)(1). made applicable empowered prescribed ex parte orders them, thereby further curtailing agency's inquiries. 78u(h)(2). 19 Considerable insight legislators' conception investigatory gleaned foregoing developments. know occasion consider whose exposed thereby. tailored agencies' power, designed "to strike balance between privacy need investigations." H.R.Rep. 95-1383, p. 33 (1978), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 9305. dealt problem teaches two things. First, seems apparent subpoenas.16 Second, complexity subtlety embodied suggest find troubling crude unqualified notification Appeals.17 C 20 last footings entitlement effectuated derive combination decisions. Distilled, follows: comport U.S., 57-58, 254-255.18 Not recipient subpoena, therewith, met. ways. relying Reisman Caplin, 375 445, 84 508, 511, 459 529, 541,19 permissive intervention action recipient. threatens turn over information, "might restrain compliance" recipient, forcing institute suit. supra, 450, 514. avail himself options aware ensure ignorance asserting conclude, him 21 There tenuous links argument. Especially debatable proposition consistent assertion order preventing Certainly held. present, assume, enjoys each identified Nevertheless, conclude inappropriate elaborate mandating 22 Two underlie issue. administration advocated courts. obvious difficulty involve investigations.20 often undertakes suspicious knowledge involved violated law.21 wrongdoers situation virtually impossible. thus obliged point assembled focus suspicion manageable subset participants transaction, lending them status entitling task apparent. identify reasonable ease inquiry, arise. circumstances, deserved therefore assess sort, district kind hearing thrust ongoing investigation.22 Implementation new drain resources judiciary well Commission.23 23 every able discourage disclosure damaging seriously, flow received unscrupulous destroy alter intimidate transfer Government.24 context regulation, where speed locating halting important, loathe place potent weapons hands desire keep bay. 24 acknowledge practice improper reasons. accept proposal "would unwarrantedly cast stultify [Commission's] move," 531, 542. Particularly view Congress' manifest disinclination require seeks others, see, 746-747 refuse curb power.25 III 25 Nothing construed imply inform someone else. But, reasons indicated above, decline curtail Accordingly, reversed, remanded opinion. 26 ordered. Investigation after conducted preliminary "no process [nor] compelled." 202.5(a) purposes seem define ensuing establish resort compulsory 96-1321, pt. 1, (1980). relationships individual owners fully elucidated us. Because, litigation, identical, hereinafter referred collectively except divergence treatment courts below requires differentiated. were defective, did valid purpose, afforded subjects chance comment it, around revolved litigated proceeding. Complaint 9-15. pendency suit, request, refrained Because Inc., personal capacity, declined complied demanding brief petition longer disposition appeal, various actions. prevailed least suits, Magnuson, 82-1178-Z (Mass., Aug. 11, 1982) (enforcing family members); still C-82-282-RJM Apr. 19, Cf. 82-2042 (Idaho, July 27, (rejecting motion wife quash institution). cross-petitioned, validity merits themselves cited text respectively. conducting gives rise case, relied solely Acts. Many contain 79r (Public Utility Holding Company 1935); 77uuu(a) (Trust Indenture 1939); 80a-41(a), (Investment 1940); 80b-9(a), Advisers 1940). analogous are: 79r(d) (incorporating reference 77v(b)) 80a-41(c) 80b-9(c) Doe, 465 605, 612-613, 1237, 1242, 552 noted weaker Miller unlike customer, argue question. 455-456, 1629-1630 (MARSHALL, J., dissenting). Donovan Lone Steer, 408, 414-415, 769, 773, 78 567 (1984) (discussing subpoena). similarly delegations 8, supra. practice, nonpublic. L. Loss, Regulation 1955 (2d ed. 1961); Report Advisory Committee Enforcement Policies Practices (1972). 9273 (the fill gap left contest access records"). regard, noteworthy Committees expressed supplement remedies created implied causes (1980), 3874; 54, 56, 225, 230 (1978). significance lessons illuminate subsequently amended crucial 743-744. Rather, adoption proposed disrupt system securities, modified refined years 1933. analysis contemplated factors deciding create private adjunct statute: "[I]s underlying legislative scheme .?" See, e.g., Cannon University Chicago, 441 677, 688, 9, 703-708, 99 1946, 1952, 1961-1963, 60 560 (1979); Cort Ash, 422 66, 78, 95 2080, 2087, 45 (1975). holding Commissioner Internal demonstrate probable cause secure 7602 Code. went sketch satisfy: "He Commissioner's steps Code followed. [A] permit abused. Such abuse take harass taxpayer put pressure settle collateral dispute, reflecting good faith investigation." 254-255 (footnote omitted). LaSalle National Bank, 437 298, 313-314, 98 2357, 2365-2366, 57 221 Some satisfy E.G., ESM Securities, 645 310, 313-314 (CA5 1981). cf. re EEOC, 709 392, 398, 1983). follow "administrative steps" means auspices purview Investigation, dispose pass characterization application Powell. Reisman, dictum "both summoned [under 7602] appear intervene claims." 511; 449, 513. clear "is mandatory," 541, "[t]he usual balancing opposing equities," 530, Neither term "target," either outset develop working definition term. So, sometimes called unusually active company during immediately preceding tender offer stock. idea (if any) thousands purchasers inside 1069 (CA9 1983) (case below) ("The target's proceedings"). laying bare state intentions midway sketched below, exposure significantly hamper efforts police PepsiCo 563 F.Supp. 828, 832 (SDNY (To impose necessarily targets—and presumably effectively monitor Experience common sense greatly abused ."); NLRB Robbins Tire Rubber Co., 214, 239, 2311, 2325, 159 (1978) (citing employers unions attempt "coerce statements" reason exempt Freedom Information statements Labor Relations Board). Arthur Young 805, 816, 1495, 826 (" '[A]bsent unambiguous directions Congress,' " conferred Service restricted courts) (quoting Bisceglia, 420 141, 150, 915, 921, 43 88 (1975)).

Category: 7