Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-508_l6gn.pdf
Page Number: 12

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

dog.

Further, the structure of the Act beyond §13(b) confirms
this  conclusion.  Congress  in  §5(l)  and  §19  gave  district
courts the authority to impose limited monetary penalties 
and to award monetary relief in cases where the Commis-
sion has issued cease and desist orders, i.e., where the Com-
mission has engaged in administrative proceedings.  Since 
in these provisions Congress explicitly provided for “other 
and further equitable relief,” 15 U. S. C. §45(l), and for the 
“refund  of  money  or  return  of  property,”  §57b(b),  it  likely 
did not intend for §13(b)’s more cabined “permanent injunc-
tion” language to have similarly broad scope.

More than that, the latter provision (§19) comes with cer-
tain important limitations that are absent in §13(b).  As rel-
evant here, §19 applies only where the Commission begins
its §5 process within three years of the underlying violation 
and seeks monetary relief within one year of any result-
ing final cease and desist order.  15 U. S. C. §57b(d).  And 
it  applies  only  where  “a  reasonable  man  would  have 
known under the circumstances” that the conduct at is-
sue  was  “dishonest  or  fraudulent.”  §57b(a)(2);  see  also 
§45(m)(1)(B)(2)  (providing  court-ordered  monetary  penal-
ties  against  anyone  who  engages  in  conduct  previously 
identified as prohibited in a final cease and desist order, but 
only if the violator acted with “actual knowledge that such 
act  or  practice  is  unfair  or  deceptive”).    In  addition,  Con-
gress  enacted  these  other,  more  limited,  monetary  relief
provisions at the same time as, or a few years after, it en-
acted §13(b) in 1973.

It  is  highly  unlikely  that  Congress  would  have  enacted 
provisions  expressly  authorizing  conditioned  and  limited 
monetary relief if the Act, via §13(b), had already implicitly 
allowed the Commission to obtain that same monetary re-
lief and more without satisfying those conditions and limi-
tations.  Nor is it likely that Congress, without mentioning
the matter, would have granted the Commission authority