Image by Aliman Senai

In the 135 days since the Trump administration took control of the nation’s consumer watchdog agency, it has not recorded a single enforcement action against banks, credit card companies, debt collectors or any finance companies whatsoever, according to an Associated Press review.

Reporter Ken Sweet writes that’s likely no fluke: “Mick Mulvaney, appointed acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in late November, promised to shrink the bureau’s mandate and take a much softer approach to enforcement, and records reviewed by The Associated Press indicate he has kept his word.”

Tthe bureau issued an average of two to four enforcement actions a month under former Director Richard Cordray, President Obama’s appointee. But the database shows zero enforcement actions have been taken since Nov. 21, 2017, three days before Cordray resigned.

Read the AP article.

The renewable energy industry, now designated as a technology and innovation-related area of special concern to the protection of the U.S. industrial and scientific base, is one of seven sectors that the U.S. Trade Representative recently identified as being of significant national security concern, writes Stephen Paul Mahinka in the Power & Pipes blog for Morgan Lewis.

“The USTR’s primary concern in its investigation was with acquisitions and investments related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation in seven industry sectors that it specifically identified as being of significant national security concern. Renewable energy is one of the seven sectors highlighted for increased scrutiny, through expanded reviews of certain types of deals by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States,” according to the post.

Although the report focused on Chinese acquisitions and investments, the identification of renewable energy as one of the seven main industry sectors of concern means that acquisitions and investments by entities in other foreign nations may also be subject to heightened scrutiny by the committee, explains Mahinka.

Read the article.

Hunton & Williams LLP has posted an on-demand webinar discussing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s recently released cybersecurity guidance.

For the first time since its last major staff pronouncement on cybersecurity in 2011, the SEC has released new interpretive guidance for public companies that will change the way issuers approach cybersecurity risk, the firm says on its website.

Presenters are partners Lisa Sotto, Aaron Simpson and Scott Kimpel, and senior associate Brittany Bacon. They discuss the new guidance, along with changes in regulatory obligations under EU law with respect to the upcoming GDPR and historical SEC enforcement actions related to cybersecurity.

Watch the on-demand webinar.

Bloomberg is reporting that Barclays Plc agreed to pay $2 billion to settle a probe into how it sold the sort of mortgage bonds that fueled the financial crisis, securing a penalty less than half of what U.S. authorities originally demanded.

Reporters Stephen Morris and Gavin Finch explained: “The British lender was the only bank to push back against the size of the settlement demanded by the Justice Department, prompting the prosecutor to file a lawsuit in the waning days of the Obama administration in 2016. The DOJ wanted a fine of about $5 billion, but the bank refused to pay any more than $2 billion, Bloomberg news reported in 2016.”

Two former executives at the bank, Paul Menefee and John Carroll, also settled Thursday and agreed to pay $2 million to resolve claims without admitting wrongdoing.

Read the Bloomberg article.

PilieroMazza has posted an on-demand webinar discussing compliance with new laws requiring or providing a preference for the purchase of goods, products, or materials produced in the United States.

President Trump signed Executive Order 13788 on April 18, 2017, aimed at tougher enforcement of the “Buy American Laws” which are those laws requiring or providing a preference for the purchase of goods, products, or materials produced in the United States. Given the Trump administration’s intent for stricter enforcement of domestic preference requirements, government contractors need to stay abreast of the relevant laws and regulations, such as the Buy American Act  and the Trade Agreement Act, the firm says on its website.

Webinar topics include:

• The general requirements of the BAA and TAA
• The applicability of the requirements and exceptions to their applicability
• Tests for determining a product’s country of origin
• Relevant FAR clauses and certifications
• The potential penalties for non-compliance
• Practical tips and strategies for compliance

Watch the on-demand webinar.

The State Department will be improving transparency in its requirements for contractor cooperation with its Office of Inspector General, according to Federal News Radio.

“While the Foreign Affairs Manual authorizes the OIG to access a contractor’s documents and interview its employees during the scope of an investigation, that provision is not currently explicitly expressed in the contracts signed by vendors,” writes David Thornton. “The OIG and the department are moving to correct this issue, and hopefully head off any further confusion or misunderstandings.”

The change is intended to head off problems such as the one seen earlier this year when a contractor would not comply with requests for an IT audit of security controls.

Read the article.

Image by Mike Mozart

The biggest U.S. antitrust case of this century kicked into high gear Thursday as a government lawyer warned that AT&T Inc. wants to buy media giant Time Warner Inc. to “weaponize” its must-have content — a move that would raise prices for consumers and hinder innovation, according to the Los Angeles Times.

In opening arguments, Justice Department lawyer Craig Conrath said AT&T could use Time Warner’s content as a weapon against competitors that rely on the programming.

Reporter Jim Puzzanghera writes: “AT&T’s added leverage over pay-TV competitors to withhold content from some of the most valuable assets in entertainment — including HBO, CNN, TBS, TNT and Warner Bros., Hollywood’s largest TV and film studio — would cause prices to rise by more than $400 million a year for Americans, Conrath said.”

Read the LA Times article.

National Labor Relations Board member William Emanuel violated a White House ethics pledge by participating in a closely watched case involving his former law firm, the NLRB’s inspector general concluded in a report obtained by Bloomberg Law.

Bloomberg reporters Chris Opfer and Hassan A. Kanu write that Emanuel told Inspector General David Berry that he didn’t realize former firm Littler Mendelson represented a business in the seminal Browning-Ferris Industries case, although he previously flagged the litigation for lawmakers as one that he might need to sit out, according to Berry’s report. Emanuel then joined the rest of the five-member board in directing its top attorney to ask an appeals court to drop the case.

They report that Berry said the inconsistency in Emanuel’s statements to Congress and the IG “is not sufficient to show that” Emanuel “intentionally lied.”

Read the Bloomberg article.

The Trump administration has nominated Sharon Fast Gustafson to fill the vacant position of general counsel of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Above the Law reports that Gustafson spent four years at Jones Day before becoming a solo practitioner in 1995.

The GC’s position at the EEOC has been vacant since December of 2016.

“The top litigator position has broad discretion in deciding what Title VII cases to pursue, and, as such, will take the lead in determining the Trump administration’s stance on such hot button issues as sexual harassment and the gender pay gap,” writes Above the Law editor Kathryn Rubino.

Read the Above the Law article.

Image by Mark Moz

The Washington Post is reporting that the Senate is slated to pass far-reaching legislation this week to roll back key components of financial regulations put in place after the global financial crisis.

If made into law, the legislation would weaken the Dodd-Frank Act and would free dozens of financial institutions from the strictest rules put in place by regulators after the crisis, explains reporter Renae Merle.

The bill would raise the “too big to fail” standard for troubled banks, soften capital requirement for banks, offer small banks relief from the “Volcker rule” that bars banks from making risky wagers with their own money, and offers some banks relief from some restrictions on mortgage lending. The proposed legislation, however, would not weaken the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Read the Post article.

The Antitrust Update of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler discusses a Federal Trade Commission case in which it appears an amicus brief may have been dispositive to the outcome of an appeal.

In Federal Trade Commission v. Penn State Hershey Medical Center, a group of 36 economists affiliated with top universities across the country filed an amicus brief explaining that the lower court used a faulty economic theory when it ruled against the FTC. The appellate court cited the brief when it reversed the district court.

Authors Jake Walter-Warner and Jonathan H. Hatch examine the brief’s influence on the appellate court and show how the court laid out the issues with the district court’s analysis just as the amicus brief did.

Read the article.

The National Labor Relations Board threw out its most important ruling of 2017 — a 3-2 victory for major U.S. corporations — following an internal agency report that found that a potential conflict-of-interest had tainted the vote, reports Bloomberg, via the Chicago Tribune.

Bloomberg reporter explains that the discarded ruling, called Hy-Brand, had reversed a controversial Obama-era “joint employer” decision empowering workers to pursue claims against, or seek collective bargaining with, major corporations that don’t sign their paychecks, such as franchisors or clients of contractors.

“The vote overturning that 2015 case included support from Trump-appointed William Emanuel, whose former law firm had represented one of the companies in the original case, Browning-Ferris,” Eidelson reports.

Read the Tribune article.

Next week the Supreme Court will hear oral argument on whether to reverse a 41-year-old ruling that allows states to require government employees to pay union dues even though they don’t want to be union members.

“It’s a familiar question for eight of the nine justices, who have already heard oral argument on the issue twice,” writes Amy Howe in SCOTUSblog. “The court did not resolve the issue the first time; the second time, in the wake of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, they deadlocked. This means that the outcome in [petitioner Mark] Janus’ case could hinge on the vote of the court’s newest justice, Neil Gorsuch.”

The case, appealed by Janus, an employee of the state of Illinois, comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit rejected his argument that the agency fee violated his rights under the First Amendment.

Read the SCOTUSblog article.

An assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice has warned that the DOJ would soon launch criminal enforcement actions against companies that have so-called “no poaching agreements” with each other, whereby they agree not to solicit one another’s employees, reports Bloomberg.

Makan Delrahim, assistant AG in the Antitrust Division, says his division has “been very active” in reviewing potential violations of the antitrust laws caused by these agreements and added that “in the coming couple of months,” the public “will see some announcements” of DOJ actions.

Writing for Bloomberg, three Seyfarth Shaw lawyers warn, “The bright line has now been drawn: Any violative anti-poaching policies after October 2016 expose employers to criminal punishment. In fact, for the DOJ Antirust Division, such enforcement actions might prove to be like shooting fish in a barrel.”

Read the Bloomberg article.

U.S. Bank, the fifth-largest commercial bank by assets in the United States, was charged by the the Justice Department on Thursday with failing to guard against illegal activity and, in at least one instance, even abetting it, reports The New York Times.

The bank is charged with severely neglecting anti-money laundering rules, helping a payday lender operate an illegal business and lying to a regulator about its plans for tracking potential criminal activity by bank customers, writes reporter Emily Flitter.

The bank settled the Justice Department charges and cases brought by other regulators by agreeing to pay various fines and penalties totaling $613 million.

Read the NY Times article.

Zapproved and General Counsel News have posted an on-demand webinar that can help executives and lawyers learn about the impact and strategies associated with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation set to take effect in May. (See the video below.)

While the GDPR standardizes data protection law across the EU, it doesn’t spell out how U.S. companies can update data preservation processes to be compliant. This on-demand webinar offers key steps on ensuring a company’s approach to processing personal data of EU citizens meets these new cross-border data privacy guidelines.

The webinar covers such topics as:

• Prepare for Article 30’s demand for detailed record keeping
• Article 30 of the GDPR broadly requires that data controllers and data processors maintain a detailed record of their processing activities.
• Understand the U.S and EU perspectives on privacy rights
• Consider gaining ISO2l701 certification
• Gaining ISO2l701 certification, an International standard of security that European regulators cite, demonstrates that you’re thinking like an international citizen with a cross-border responsibility.

In its determination to reverse a two-decade slump in U.S. stock listings, the SEC might offer companies an extreme incentive to go public: the ability to bar aggrieved shareholders from suing, reports Bloomberg.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has privately signaled that it’s open to at least considering whether companies should be able to force investors to settle disputes through arbitration, an often closed-door process that can limit the bad publicity and high legal costs triggered by litigation, writes Benjamin Bain.

“But allowing companies to shield themselves from shareholder lawsuits would almost certainly enrage investor advocates and Democratic lawmakers, a combination that helped defeat a 2012 attempt by private-equity giant Carlyle Group LP to prohibit investor suits as part of its IPO,” Bain explains.

Read the Bloomberg article.

Senior officials with the National Labor Relations Board have expressed concern over a plan outlined by the board’s new general counsel to demote the senior civil servants who resolve most labor cases, reports The New York Times.

Peter B. Robb, the agency’s general counsel and a Trump appointee, outlined the proposal this month in a conference call with the civil servants

“Under the proposal, those civil servants — considered by many conservatives and employers to be biased toward labor — would answer to a small cadre of officials installed above them in the National Labor Relations Board’s hierarchy,” explains Noam Scheiber.

The result could be result in a system friendlier to employers named in complaints of unfair labor practices or facing unionization drives.

Read the Times article.

NAVEX Global will present a complimentary webinar on recent and anticipated enforcement and regulatory changes as they relate to third-party risk.

The online event will be Thursday, Jan. 25, at 1 p.m. EST / 10 a.m. PST.

Michael Volkov, renowned FCPA and third-party due diligence expert, will help participants learn about new FCPA policies and DOJ advice, data privacy regulations coming in May and more.

Participants also will learn what’s ahead in the world of anti-bribery, corruption and third-party risk management efforts.

Anyone who can’t watch the live online event may register to receive a recording of the webinar afterwards.

Register for the webinar.

A group of 22 Democratic state attorneys general, including those from California and New York, filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to block the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of tough net neutrality rules for online traffic, according to The Los Angeles Times.

The AGs’ complaint argues that the vote last month by the Republican-controlled FCC was an “arbitrary and capricious” change to regulations, writes reporter Jim Puzzanghera.

“The repeal of net neutrality would turn internet service providers into gatekeepers, allowing them to put profits over consumers while controlling what we see, what we do and what we say online,” said New York Atty. Gen. Eric T. Schneiderman, who is leading the suit.

Read the LA Times article.