News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Whistleblowers › Sarbanes-Oxley

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more

Houston Harbaugh, P.C.

SCOTUS: Whistleblowers need not prove retaliatory intent under Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Houston Harbaugh, P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that proving an employer’s retaliatory intent is not required for whistleblowers seeking protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 445 (2024),...more

NAVEX

A Look at the Whistleblowers Who Made Lasting Impacts

NAVEX on

As seen in the previous article, whistleblowing cases regularly make the news headlines. And while some of the names of the reporters or the cases are well known, it’s worthwhile to take a closer look at the people behind the...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Employment Flash - March 2024

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

In this issue of Employment Flash: the new DOL rule on independent contractors, SCOTUS’s unanimous Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower ruling, plus labor law developments in California, Delaware, D.C., New York, the EU, Germany and...more

Littler

Littler Lightbulb: February Appellate Roundup

Littler on

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month....more

ArentFox Schiff

SCOTUS Holds That SOX Whistleblowers Are Not Required to Prove Retaliatory Intent

ArentFox Schiff on

In a victory for whistleblowers, a unanimous US Supreme Court has held that a whistleblower invoking the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1514A(a) (SOX) is not required to prove that his or her employer acted with...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

Whistleblower Risks: United States Supreme Court Clarifies Burden of Proof

Poyner Spruill LLP on

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, holding that whistleblowers asserting retaliation claims under Sarbanes-Oxley must prove protected activity was a contributing factor...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Supreme Court Reverses Second Circuit in Favor of Whistleblower Plaintiff, Holding That SOX Plaintiffs Need Not Prove Retaliatory...

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Second Circuit’s decision in Murray v. UBS and resolved a circuit split in favor of employees, holding that although intent is an element of a Sarbanes-Oxley...more

Lathrop GPM

Lower Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers Established in Landmark Supreme Court Case

Lathrop GPM on

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC holding that whistleblowers are not required to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under...more

Fisher Phillips

Snapshot on Workplace Safety: Will SCOTUS Whistleblower Ruling Have Broader Impact on OSHA Investigations?

Fisher Phillips on

Welcome to this edition of the FP Snapshot on workplace safety, where we take a quick snapshot look at a recent significant workplace law development that affects your safety and health programs. This edition is devoted to...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

United States Supreme Court Endorses Low Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U. S. ____, 2024 WL 478566 (2024), the United States Supreme Court (Sotomayor, J.) held that whistleblowers do not need to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

SCOTUS Issues Decision with Significant Implications for Future Whistleblower Cases

Goulston & Storrs PC on

On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U.S. ___(2024), a case involving a former UBS employee’s claim that he was terminated for making an internal report...more

BakerHostetler

Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC - Whistleblower Retaliation Without Need to Prove Retaliatory Intent

BakerHostetler on

On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) unanimously ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC that employers can violate whistleblower protection statutes without evidence establishing retaliatory...more

The Volkov Law Group

Supreme Court’s Unanimous Decision Provides Important Protections for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers

The Volkov Law Group on

In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the case, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC et al. (February 8, 2024).  The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms an...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Holds Proof of Retaliatory Intent Not Required for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Claims

Jones Day on

The Background: In August 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC., et al. ("Murray") that an employee suing his employer under the anti-retaliation provisions of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Endorses Low Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In a landmark unanimous ruling late last week, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, et al. 601 U. S. ____ (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court held that whistleblowers do not need to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent”...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court Says Whistleblowers Do Not Need to Prove Retaliatory Intent

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

Last week in a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that an employee who sued his former employer for retaliatory termination did not need to prove a retaliatory intent behind the decision. Murray v. UBS...more

Morgan Lewis

Nuclear Whistleblower Cases: Supreme Court’s Sox Whistleblower Rationale Will Likely Be Applied

Morgan Lewis on

The US Supreme Court ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities LLC that whistleblowers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) need not prove retaliatory intent. This ruling is consistent with current precedent for Energy Reorganization...more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

SCOTUS Makes It Harder for Employers to Defend Against Federal Whistleblower Claims

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

The Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous pro-employee ruling that makes it harder for employers to defend whistleblower claims. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, the Court rejected the argument that an employer must have...more

Miller Nash LLP

(We Can’t Have No) Retaliation: Part Two—Important Lessons for Employers Resulting from the SCOTUS Whistleblower Decision

Miller Nash LLP on

Outlined in part one of our series—SCOTUS Clarifies Whistleblower Claims Standard under Sarbanes Oxley—the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a federal court of appeals decision, resolving a recent federal appeals court split...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

The US Supreme Court Rules in Murray v. UBS That SOX Whistleblowers Do Not Need To Prove Retaliatory Intent

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP on

On Feb. 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC that plaintiffs bringing whistleblower retaliation claims under Section 1514A of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 do not need to prove...more

Miller Nash LLP

(We Can’t Have No) Retaliation: Part One—SCOTUS Clarifies Whistleblower Claims Standard under Sarbanes Oxley

Miller Nash LLP on

On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a federal court of appeals decision, resolving a relatively recent federal appeals court split regarding the standard for liability in Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower claims....more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Eases Standard for Proving Whistleblower Retaliation Claims

Foley Hoag LLP on

On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the standard for proving causation under the whistleblower protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (the “Act”), easing the burden of proof employees...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Supreme Court Confirms Retaliatory Intent Is Irrelevant in Proving SOX Retaliation

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On February 8, 2024, in its Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC1 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a whistleblower pursuing a claim for retaliation under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) does not need to...more

Cozen O'Connor

Supreme Court Defines "Contributing Factor" Standard in Whistleblower Cases

Cozen O'Connor on

On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaiting decision in Murray v. UBS Securities. Murray interpreted the “contributing factor” element that a plaintiff must prove to make out a claim of whistleblower...more

178 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 8
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide