Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-86_l5gm.pdf
Page Number: 8

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

as “neglect of duty” or “malfeasance.”  5 U. S. C. §§7521(a), 
1202(d).  An ALJ assigned to hear an SEC or FTC enforce-
ment action has authority, much like a regular trial judge, 
to  resolve motions, hold  a  hearing,  and then  issue  a deci-
sion.  See 16 CFR §§3.21–3.56 (2021); 17 CFR §§201.221– 
201.360 (2021). 

A losing party may appeal the ALJ’s ruling to the Com-
mission; alternatively, the Commission may undertake re-
view on its own initiative.  See 16 CFR §§3.52–3.53; 17 CFR 
§§201.410–201.411.  Upon  completion  of  internal  review, 
the Commission enters a final decision.  See 16 CFR §3.54; 
17 CFR §201.411(a).  Or if no such review has occurred, the 
ALJ’s ruling itself becomes the decision of the Commission. 
See 15 U. S. C. §78d–1(c); 16 CFR §3.51(a). 

The Exchange Act and FTC Act both provide for review 
of a final Commission decision in a court of appeals, rather 
than a district court.  Under the Exchange Act, “[a] person 
aggrieved by [an SEC] final order . . . may obtain review of 
the  order”  by  filing  a  petition  in  a  court  of  appeals.  15 
U. S. C. §78y(a)(1).  That petition gives the appellate court 
“jurisdiction” to “affirm or modify and enforce or to set aside 
the  order  in  whole  or  in  part.”  §78y(a)(3).   The  FTC  Act 
similarly provides that the  party subject to an FTC order 
may “obtain a review of such order” in a court of appeals, 
and grants the court “jurisdiction” to “affirm[ ], modify[ ], or 
set[ ] aside the order.”  §45(c). 

The  cases  before  us,  though,  did  not  take  the  above-
described course.  In  each, the  respondent  in an  adminis-
trative enforcement action sued in district court prior to an 
ALJ decision, seeking to enjoin the Commission’s proceed-
ing.  Each suit charged that some fundamental aspect of the 
Commission’s structure violates the Constitution; that the 
violation made the entire proceeding unlawful; and that be-
ing subjected to such an illegitimate proceeding causes le-
gal  injury  (independent  of  any  rulings  the  ALJ  might 
make).  Finally, each suit premised jurisdiction on district