SEC whistleblower retaliation – and the federal securities laws – after Digital Realty.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Digital Realty Trust, Inc v. Somers and its significance for whistleblower retaliation remedies and securities law interpretation generally.Design methodology approach The authors review the statutory, regulatory and decisional history of the anti-whistleblower retaliation remedies of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act and the Dodd–Frank Act; how they were seen by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and most courts to be in conflict, and how they were ultimately harmonized by the Supreme Court in Digital Realty.Findings In Digital Realty, the Supreme Court ruled against the SEC and the leading Courts of Appeal and established that only one who reports securities law violations to the SEC can sue in federal court under the Dodd–Frank Act; all others are limited to the lesser remedies provided by the Sarbanes–Oxley Act. This simple conclusion raises a number of unresolved questions, which the authors identify and discuss. Also, the Supreme Court unanimously continued the pattern of federal securities laws decisions marked by a close reading of the text and a desire to limit private litigants’ access to the federal courts.Originality value This paper provides valuable information and insights about the legal protections for SEC whistleblowers from experienced securities lawyers and more generally on the principles that appear to guide securities law decisions in the Supreme Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]