To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC, No. 19-508: Petitioner Scott Tucker controlled a number of companies offering short-term payday loans. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) brought suit, claiming that Tucker and his companies were violating the Federal Trade Commission Act by engaging in “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” – namely, that the companies’ explanation of its loan terms to customers were misleading compared to the fine print the companies enforced. The FTC sought a permanent injunction, as well as restitution and disgorgement, relying upon §13(b) of the Act, which authorizes the FTC to obtain a “permanent injunction” against “any person, partnership, or corporation” that “is violating or is about to violate, any provision of law” that the FTC enforces. The District Court found for the FTC, granting both an injunction and ordering $1.27 billion in restitution and disgorgement. The Ninth Circuit affirmed over Tucker’s objection that §13(b) does not authorize the monetary relief that was granted. The Court today reversed, holding that the statutory language in §13(b) does not authorize the FTC to seek, or a court to award, equitable monetary relief such as restitution or disgorgement. Justice Breyer issued the Court’s unanimous opinion.