Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-859new_kjfm.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to  notify  the  Reporter  of 
Decisions,  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  Washington,  D. C.  20543, 
pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 22–859 
_________________ 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 
PETITIONER v. GEORGE R. JARKESY, JR., 
 ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT 

[June 27, 2024] 

  CHIEF  JUSTICE  ROBERTS  delivered  the  opinion  of  the 
Court. 
  In 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission initi-
ated  an  enforcement  action  against  respondents  George 
Jarkesy, Jr., and Patriot28, LLC, seeking civil penalties for 
alleged securities fraud.  The SEC chose to adjudicate the 
matter in-house before one of its administrative law judges, 
rather than in federal court where respondents could have 
proceeded before a jury.  We consider whether the Seventh 
Amendment permits the SEC to compel respondents to de-
fend themselves before the agency rather than before a jury 
in federal court. 

I 
A 
  In the aftermath of the Wall Street Crash of 1929, Con-
gress passed a suite of laws designed to combat securities 
fraud and increase market transparency.  Three such stat-
utes are relevant here: The Securities Act of 1933, the Se-
curities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers 
Act of 1940.  48 Stat. 74, 15 U. S. C. §§77a et seq.; 48 Stat.