Is Sarbox Constitutional?
Is Sarbox Constitutional?
The Supreme Court is reviewing whether the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board created by Sarbanes Oxley is Constitutional.
According to Yahoo Finance,
“A small Nevada accounting firm and an anti-tax group brought the challenge to the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law, arguing that the board created by the law violates the Constitution’s separation of powers mandate because the president cannot appoint or remove its members.”
“The board wields too much, unchecked power, Michael Carvin, the challengers’ lawyer told the court.”
I have discussed the untold damage Sarbanes Oxley has caused to U.S. innovation. For more information see Sarbanes Oxley – the Medicine is Worse than the Disease and Sarbanes Oxley – the Medicine is Worse than the Disease-2 .
The Supreme Court in recent history has rarely found that there has been an unconstitutional delegation of power. It is possible that Board may violate the Administrative Procedure Act, but I do not believe that this is the issue before the Supreme Court. Even if the Supreme Court were to rule that the Board is unconstitutional, this is unlikely to significantly reduce the damage caused by Sarbox. The good news is that Sarbox seems to be under attack on a number of different fronts.
No comments yet.
Leave a comment
-
Recent
- Burning the Ships: Intellectual Property and the Transformation of Microsoft
- Levine & Boldrin Argue the U.S. Should End the Patent System
- Is Sarbox Constitutional?
- Climate Change and Innovation
- Explaining Patent Law Through the Lens of Natural Rights
- ACLU – Gene Patent Non-Sense
- Is Money an Abstract Concept?
- Jump Starting a Secondary Market for Patents
- Bilski Case Reveals Supremes Ignorance
- Patent Reform Propoganda
- Circumventing Sarbox and the IPO Drought
- Sarbox Update
-
Links
-
Archives
- December 2009 (5)
- November 2009 (9)
- October 2009 (11)
- September 2009 (11)
- August 2009 (10)
- July 2009 (10)
- June 2009 (14)
- May 2009 (11)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS