Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-222_2c83.pdf
Page Number: 14

Cite as:  594 U. S. ____ (2021) 

11 

Opinion of the Court 

between  a  misrepresentation  and  the  price  paid  by  the 
plaintiff—and  a  defendant’s  mere  production  of  some  evi-
dence relevant to price impact would rarely accomplish that
feat.4 

Accepting  Goldman  and  the  dissent’s  argument  would 
also effectively negate Halliburton II’s holding that plain-
tiffs need not directly prove price impact in order to invoke 
the Basic presumption.  573 U. S., at 278–279.  If, as they
urge, the defendant could defeat Basic’s presumption by in-
troducing  any  competent  evidence  of  a  lack  of  price  im-
pact—including, for example, the generic nature of the al-
leged misrepresentations—then the plaintiff would end up 
with the burden of directly proving price impact in almost 
every  case.   And  that  would  be  nearly  indistinguishable 
from the regime that Halliburton II rejected.

Thus, the best reading of our precedents—as the Courts
of Appeals to have considered the issue have recognized—
is  that  the  defendant  bears  the  burden  of  persuasion  to
prove  a  lack  of  price  impact.    See  Waggoner  v.  Barclays 
PLC, 875 F. 3d 79, 99–104 (CA2 2017) (“the phrase ‘[a]ny
showing that severs the link’ aligns more logically with im-
posing a burden of persuasion rather than a burden of pro-
duction”); In re Allstate, 966 F. 3d, at 610–611 (“Basic said 
that ‘[a]ny showing that severs the link’ would be sufficient 
to rebut the presumption, not that mere production of evi-
dence  would  defeat  the  presumption”  (citation  omitted)). 
We likewise agree with the Courts of Appeals that the de-
fendant must carry that burden by a preponderance of the 
evidence.  See Waggoner, 875 F. 3d, at 99; In re Allstate, 966 
F. 3d, at 610. 

Although the defendant bears the burden of persuasion, 

—————— 

4 The dissent points out that, as a general rule, presumptions shift only
the burden of production.  Post, at 2–4.  We don’t disagree, but we read 
Basic and Halliburton II as a clear departure from that general rule.