TheCorporateCounsel.net

The 5th Circuit hasn’t exactly been a friendly jurisdiction for the SEC in recent years, but yesterday, in National Center for Public Policy Research v. SEC, (5th Cir.; 11/24), the Court rejected a conservative advocacy group’s challenge to the legality of the SEC’s Rule 14a-8 no-action letter process. Here’s an excerpt from Bloomberg Law’s article on the decision:

A federal appeals court on Thursday left in place the SEC’s power to referee which shareholder proposals companies allow on their annual meeting ballots, tossing a case from business and right-leaning groups fighting the agency’s influence.

The Securities and Exchange Commission issued non-binding guidance that fell outside of judicial review when it advised supermarket chain Kroger Co. it could block a vote on a conservative organization’s antidiscrimination proposal in 2023, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled. Companies looking to keep shareholder proposals they consider repetitive or disruptive to their business off their ballots usually seek SEC guidance. The SEC can sue if companies bar votes without adequate justification.

The Fifth Circuit is the first court to formally weigh in on whether the SEC’s advice is a formal commission order as corporate attacks on the refereeing system have increased under SEC Chair Gary Gensler, who in 2021 made it easier for investors to file environmental, social, and governance proposals.

The Court’s ruling that the SEC’s no-action process under Rule 14a-8 did not involve a formal SEC order subject to judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act was actually an alternative basis for dismissing the plaintiff’s claim. The Court also held that the claim was moot, since Kroger ultimately included the proposal in its 2023 proxy statement.

– John Jenkins