SEC Office of the Whistleblower

Jane Norberg Named Chief of SEC Whistleblower Office

SEC Office of the Whistleblower
SEC Newsroom
Contact the SEC

Assistance and information from a whistleblower who knows of possible securities law violations can be among the most powerful weapons in the law enforcement arsenal of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Through their knowledge of the circumstances and individuals involved, whistleblowers can help the Commission identify possible fraud and other violations much earlier than might otherwise have been possible. That allows the Commission to minimize the harm to investors, better preserve the integrity of the United States' capital markets, and more swiftly hold accountable those responsible for unlawful conduct.

The Commission is authorized by Congress to provide monetary awards to eligible individuals who come forward with high-quality original information that leads to a Commission enforcement action in which over $1,000,000 in sanctions is ordered. The range for awards is between 10% and 30% of the money collected.

The Office of the Whistleblower was established to administer the SEC's whistleblower program. We greatly appreciate your interest, and we hope that this website answers any questions you may have.

We understand that the decision to come forward with information about securities fraud or other wrongdoing is not one taken lightly, and we are here to answer any questions you may have. You can reach the Office of the Whistleblower at (202) 551-4790.

• Implementing the Dodd-Frank Act 
• Researching the Federal Securities Laws Through the SEC Website 
• The Laws That Govern the Securities Industry 
• The SEC Whistleblower Program was created by Congress on July 21, 2010 in Section 922 of the Dodd-Frank Act 
• Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Wikipedia
• Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Wex/LII
• 15 U.S. Code § 78c - Definitions and application, LII
• Jane Norberg has been named Chief of SEC Whistleblower Office following the departure of inaugural chief Sean McKessy
• Sean McKessy, Chief of Whistleblower Office, to Leave SEC
• SEC Announces Largest-Ever Whistleblower Award
• SEC Issues $20 Million Whistleblower Award

SEC Spotlight on Whistleblower Awards

 ______________________________________________________________________

SEC Office of the Whistleblower
Wikipedia

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) whistleblower program went into effect on July 21, 2010, when the President signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The same law also established a whistleblower incentive program at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which is run by former senior SEC enforcement attorney[1] Christopher C. Ehrman.[2][3] The program rewards people who submit tips related to violations of the Commodity Exchange Act.[4] The SEC can make awards ranging from 10 to 30 percent of the monetary sanctions collected, which are paid from its Investor Protection Fund. Read more

Eric Lipton Pulitzer Prize Winner in Investigative Reporting

Link to full 50 page edit Eric Lipton Pulitzer Prize Winner in Investigative Reporting

Dear Attorney General Lynch and FBI Director Comey

Loretta E. Lynch, U.S. Attorney General                 James Comey, FBI Director

U.S. Department of Justice                                      Federal Bureau of Investigation
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW                                935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001                                  Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
https://www.justice.gov/                                            http://www.fbi.gov/
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FNW92981779                  VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FNT91324183

Dear AG Lynch, and Director Comey:                    September 22, 2016

The Ocala Star-Banner reported January 29, 2016, "Racial incident at West Port: 3 students face discipline after taunts while waiving Confederate flags." Meanwhile, the black schoolgirl being intimidated by white supremacists with Confederate flags was wrongly cited in lieu of arrest.

U.S. Attorney Lee Bentley has jurisdiction, but there is no evidence USAFLM Bentley sought justice for the black schoolgirl intimidated by white supremacists with Confederate flags.

Fine, I bear witness to the ongoing plague of white supremacy racism in central Florida. Enclosed is my complaint to The Florida Bar against School Board attorney Steven Eleazer Lake for white supremacy racial discrimination, and obstruction of justice for concealing records.

The Ocala Police Department has not provided records for the "Racial incident at West Port: 3 students face discipline after taunts while waiving Confederate flags." See enclosed.  

In my view this offense was a hate crime under FS § 775.085 Evidencing prejudice while committing offense; reclassification, because the offense involved the race/color of the black student by three white students who used Confederate flags in a threat of force, to injure, intimidate or interfere with the black student while she was engaged in a federally protected activity, attending public school. 18 U.S.C. § 245. The black schoolgirl was justified in punching the perpetrator(s) under FS § 776.012(1), use or threatened use of force in defense of person.

My Statement Of Candidacy (for president) appears on the Federal Elections Commission website. It was accepted by the FEC on September 11, 2016, FEC-1098470, Candidate ID P60022993. If elected, I plan, inter alia, a new type of Reconstruction for certain parts of the South, to protect the rights of African-Americans forgotten by the US Department of Justice.

A joint statement by the American Bar Association and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund addressing the "troubling and destabilizing loss of public confidence in the American criminal justice system" is enclosed as part of the Florida Bar complaint. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Neil J. Gillespie, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala, Florida 34481, Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net

If you cast a write-in vote for president, will it count? State laws differ

If you cast a write-in vote for president, will it count? State laws differ

ABA Journal Daily News
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Posted Nov 07, 2016 07:00 am CST

Thinking of casting a write-in vote for president? It may not be counted.

You can write in anyone on the ballot in 10 states and Washington, D.C., the Washington Post reports. But you will face more hurdles if you want your write-in to count in other states.

Eight states don’t even have a line for write-ins, according to the article. Thirty-two states won’t count write-ins unless a candidate is registered with the state before the election.

The jurisdictions allowing write-ins for anyone are: Alabama, the District of Columbia, Iowa, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wyoming.

The states that don’t allow write-ins are: Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina and South Dakota.

There are additional restrictions in some states, including some of those that allow write-ins for anyone. In Mississippi, for example, write-ins won’t be considered unless a candidate on the ballot dies, resigns, withdraws or is removed from the ballot. Some states won’t allow a write-in to win unless additional paperwork is filed after the election.

And in some states, preciseness counts. Nicknames and initials may not be allowed. Read more

NOTE: I have a free ABA Journal Daily Newsletter online subscription. I encourage ordinary folks (nonlawyers) to read the online ABA Journal Daily News. I profile stories from the online ABA Journal on the Justice Network blog and website because it is an authority on legal matters. I find some of the best insights in the comments section.

Supreme Court's 'future as a functioning institution' is thrown into doubt, NYT editorial says

Supreme Court's 'future as a functioning institution' is thrown into doubt, NYT editorial says

ABA Journal Daily News
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Posted Nov 07, 2016 02:59 pm CST

The U.S. Supreme Court is at a crossroads, according to a New York Times editorial.

The death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February and Republicans’ refusal to consider the Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland "have converged to throw the court’s future as a functioning institution into doubt," the editorial says.

Now some Republicans are threatening to continue to block Supreme Court nominees if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency. "The indefinite blockade not only hobbles the justices’ ability to resolve current cases, it takes open aim at the court’s legitimacy as the sole unelected branch of government," the editorial says. "Because the court ‘has no influence over either the sword or the purse,’ as Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, its legitimacy and authority depend entirely on the shared public acceptance of its verdicts."

Until this year, the editorial says, no one disputed that the president should have wide latitude in choosing justices. Many Republicans opposed Supreme Court nominees Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, but they allowed the nominations to go forward. And Democrats allowed votes on Supreme Court nominees Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas, despite opposition to their nominations.

If Donald Trump wins the election, there would be calls among Democrats to block his nominees, the editorial says. "But the Constitution asks more of all of us than that," the editorial says. "In the next Congress, regardless of who wins on Tuesday, the very survival of the court as an independent body will be at stake." Read more

NOTE: I have a free ABA Journal Daily Newsletter online subscription. I encourage ordinary folks (nonlawyers) to read the online ABA Journal Daily News. I profile stories from the online ABA Journal on the Justice Network blog and website because it is an authority on legal matters. I find some of the best insights in the comments section.

Obama Meets With Trump At The White House

Barack Obama Meets With Donald Trump At The White House
The Huffington Post
By Mollie Reilly, Deputy Politics Editor
November 10, 2016

President Barack Obama met with President-elect Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday to discuss transitioning power to the Republican, who spent years attempting to delegitimize Obama’s presidency.

The two men met in the Oval Office, and reporters were ushered into the room afterward to hear brief statements from the duo.

Obama said he was "encouraged" by the meeting with Trump and the president-elect’s interest in working with his team.

"I believe that it is important for all of us, regardless of party and regardless of political preferences, to now come together, work together to deal with the many challenges that we face," he said. Read more

Election results 2016

Did FBI's Clinton disclosure and its search of Anthony Weiner's computer violate the law?

Did FBI's Clinton disclosure and its search of Anthony Weiner's computer violate the law?

ABA Journal Daily News
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Posted Oct 31, 2016 09:12 am CDT

FBI director James Comey’s disclosure on Friday that the bureau will investigate a Clinton aide’s emails has politicians and experts considering whether any laws were broken or whether any rights were violated.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said in a letter on Sunday that Comey’s disclosure 11 days before the election may have violated the Hatch Act, which restricts political activities of government workers, the Washington Post reports. And the Volokh Conspiracy’s Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University, says it’s possible the new investigation will be found to violate the Fourth Amendment.

Comey disclosed on Friday that the bureau was investigating new emails that may be relevant to its probe of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. The emails were discovered on the computer of Anthony Weiner, who was under investigation for allegedly sexting a 15-year-old girl. His wife. Huma Abedin, is a top aide to Clinton.

The FBI has obtained a search warrant, unnamed law enforcement officials told the New York Times on Sunday. Weiner’s laptop was seized on Oct. 3, and FBI agents soon learned that Abedin’s emails were on the computer. At that point, agents were told to search the metadata to see if any emails were relevant to the Clinton investigation, according to the Times. Authorities decided to seek a search warrant late last week.

University of Minnesota law professor Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer, sees some merit in Reid’s argument. In a New York Times op-ed, he said he filed a complaint on Saturday with the Office of Special Counsel, which investigates Hatch Act violations, and with the Office of Government Ethics.

"The FBI’s job is to investigate, not to influence the outcome of an election," he wrote.

Painter says a government official doesn’t have to have a specific intent to influence an election to violate the Hatch Act. "The rules are violated if it is obvious that the official’s actions could influence the election, there is no other good reason for taking those actions, and the official is acting under pressure from persons who obviously do want to influence the election," he wrote.

Painter says he is supporting Clinton in the election, though he previously supported Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and John Kasich.

Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy, meanwhile, considers case law on the Fourth Amendment and the facts that were known as of Oct. 30, when the blog post was written.

Kerr says he assumes the FBI obtained a warrant to search Weiner’s computer, as is required absent special circumstances. The search warrant presumably authorized a search relating relating only to Weiner’s communications with underage girls, Kerr says.

The first issue, he says, is whether the FBI was permitted to search through Abedin’s email account for records of Weiner’s improper messages to underage girls. He notes a Colorado Supreme Court case—which he has criticized—that dealt with officers who had a warrant to search for texts between a suspect and an undercover officer posing as an underage girl. The court found a search of a different folder that contained texts to a real underage girl violated the Fourth Amendment.

There might be similar problems in Clinton’s case because Weiner’s alleged texting crimes occurred in 2016. Hillary Clinton was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013. "If I’m right that there was a several-year gap between the warrant crime and the second investigation, it’s not clear the government could search through older emails for evidence of such a recent crime," Kerr writes.

A second issue is whether the FBI could seize the Abedin emails because they were outside the scope of the warrant, Kerr says. The "plain view" exception allows a law enforcement official who is searching a computer to obtain a second warrant to search for items in plain view that are evidence of a second crime. That standard may not be satisfied in the Clinton case, Kerr says.

"The plain view exception does not allow evidence to be seized outside a warrant unless it is ‘immediately apparent’ upon viewing it that it is evidence of another crime. Just looking quickly at the new evidence, there needs to be probable cause that it is evidence of a second crime to justify its seizure, which would presumably be necessary to apply for the second warrant," Kerr writes.

"The Fourth Amendment plain view standard doesn’t allow a seizure of emails based on a mere we-hope-to-later-determine standard. The government can’t seize the emails just because the Clinton investigation is extra important and any possible evidence is worth considering."

Kerr adds that the scope of the plain view doctrine with regards to computer searches "is very much in flux."

He also said he wanted "to flag the question of whose rights are at issue." If the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment, the only Clinton person who could move to suppress any evidence of crimes would be Abedin.

Wikileaks Ties Hillary To Clinton Foundation Pay For Play

OAN Special Report: Clinton's Pay to Play Scheme

FBI will review new emails in connection with Clinton probe

FBI director James Comey

FBI will review new emails in connection with Clinton probe

ABA Journal Daily News
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Posted Oct 28, 2016 12:42 pm CDT

Updated: FBI director James Comey told Congress on Friday that the FBI will investigate new emails that appear to be relevant to its once-closed probe of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Comey said in a letter that the FBI learned of the existence of the emails in connection with an unrelated case, report the Washington Post and the New York Times.

According to the New York Times, unnamed officials told the newspaper that the new emails were discovered after the FBI seized electronic devices belong to Anthony Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin, a top aide to Clinton. Weiner was under investigation for allegedly sexting a 15-year-old girl, the Associated Press reported in September.

The FBI "will take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation," Comey wrote.

Comey said he couldn’t predict how long it would take to complete the additional work and couldn’t assess at this time whether the new material may be significant.

The Washington Post calls Comey’s disclosure an "explosive announcement" that could shape the final days of the presidential campaign.

The FBI closed the Clinton email investigation in July with a recommendation that Clinton not be charged. Comey said at the time that Clinton and her staff were "extremely careless" in handling data, but "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case over the emails. Attorney General Loretta Lynch accepted the FBI recommendation.

In past cases involving the mishandling of classified information, Comey said in July, prosecutions "involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

 Updated at 3:45 p.m. to note that the New York Times’s report that the emails were uncovered after the seizure of Huma Abedin’s electronic devices is based on information from unnamed officials.