It appears that these district courts have misread the language of the '95 Reform Act's ``Statement of Managers.'' As I made clear in the legislative debate following the President's veto, however, the disputed language in the Statement of Managers was simply meant to explain that the Conference Committee omitted the Specter amendment because that amendment did not adequately reflect existing Second Circuit caselaw on the pleading standard. I can only hope that when the issue reaches the federal courts of appeals, these courts will undertake a more thorough review of the legislative history and correct these decisions. While I trust that the courts will ultimately honor Congress' clear intent, should the Supreme Court eventually find that recklessness no longer suffices to meet the scienter standard, it is my intent to introduce legislation that would explicitly restore recklessness as the pleading and liability standard for federal securities fraud lawsuits. I imagine that I would not be alone in this endeavor, and I ask my good friend from New York whether he would join me in introducing such legislation?
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the misinterpretation of the '95 Reform Act by district courts and proposing future legislation on securities fraud.
Share
More from Chris Dodd
it was a great honor to have Father Gregoire Fluet, my parish priest in East Haddam, CT, provide the opening prayer this morning. I thank him immensely for his words. Reaching back to Archbishop Carroll was a wonderful way to begin the…
Rosa, go get yourself well. Your job is here. Your salary is here. Just take care of yourself.
Brazil aspires to a place on the U.N. Security Council, as a member of the so-called BRICs, sees itself as the wave of the future.
In fact, it was the uncertainty inherent in a nontransparent and reckless financial system that made Dodd-Frank necessary in the first place.





