Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/17pdf/17-130_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 12.0

Cite as:  585 U. S. ____ (2018) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

Commission’s  ALJs  (like  the  Tax  Court’s  STJs)  “take
testimony.”  501  U. S.,  at  881.    More  precisely,  they
“[r]eceiv[e]  evidence”  and  “[e]xamine  witnesses”  at  hear-
ings, and may also take pre-hearing depositions.  17 CFR 
§§201.111(c),  200.14(a)(4);  see  5  U. S. C.  §556(c)(4).    Sec-
ond,  the  ALJs  (like  STJs)  “conduct  trials.”  501  U. S.,  at 
882.  As  detailed  earlier,  they  administer  oaths,  rule  on 
motions,  and  generally  “regulat[e]  the  course  of ”  a  hear-
ing,  as  well  as  the  conduct  of  parties  and  counsel. 
§201.111; see §§200.14(a)(1), (a)(7); supra, at 2.  Third, the 
ALJs  (like  STJs)  “rule  on  the  admissibility  of  evidence.” 
501  U. S.,  at  882;  see  §201.111(c).    They  thus  critically 
shape  the  administrative  record  (as  they  also  do  when
issuing  document  subpoenas).    See  §201.111(b).    And 
fourth,  the  ALJs  (like  STJs)  “have  the  power  to  enforce 
compliance  with  discovery  orders.”  501  U. S.,  at  882.    In 
particular, they may punish all “[c]ontemptuous conduct,” 
including  violations  of  those  orders,  by  means  as  severe 
as  excluding  the  offender  from  the  hearing. 
See 
§201.180(a)(1).  So point for point—straight from Freytag’s 
list—the  Commission’s  ALJs  have  equivalent  duties  and 
powers as STJs in conducting adversarial inquiries.

And  at  the  close  of  those  proceedings,  ALJs  issue  deci-
sions  much  like  that  in  Freytag—except  with  potentially 
more independent effect.  As the Freytag Court recounted, 
STJs  “prepare  proposed  findings  and  an  opinion”  adjudi-
cating  charges  and  assessing  tax  liabilities.   501  U. S.,  at 
873;  see  supra,  at  7.  Similarly,  the  Commission’s  ALJs 
issue  decisions  containing  factual  findings,  legal  conclu-
sions,  and  appropriate  remedies.    See  §201.360(b);  supra, 
at  2.  And  what  happens  next  reveals  that  the  ALJ  can
play the more autonomous role.  In a major case like Frey-
tag,  a  regular  Tax  Court  judge  must  always  review  an 
STJ’s opinion.  And that opinion counts for nothing unless
the  regular  judge  adopts  it  as  his  own.    See  501  U. S.,  at 
873.  By  contrast,  the  SEC  can  decide  against  reviewing