Forum
U.S. Supreme Court
Case Status
Docket Number
Term
2023 Term
Lower Court Opinion
Questions Presented
Under the burden-shifting framework that governs Sarbanes-Oxley cases, must a whistleblower prove his employer acted with a "retaliatory intent" as part of his case in chief, or is the lack of "retaliatory intent" part of the affirmative defense on which the employer bears the burden of proof?
Case Updates
Supreme Court holds that under Sarbanes-Oxley’s whistleblower provision, a whistleblower is not required to prove that his employer acted with retaliatory intent
February 08, 2024
U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Supreme Court to hold that an employee alleging a violation of the anti-retaliation provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2022 must prove that his employer acted with retaliatory intent when taking the challenged adverse personnel action against him
August 15, 2023
Click here to view the brief.
Kannon K. Shanmugam and William T. Marks of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center served as co-counsel for the Chamber.