Before the U.S. Supreme Court on a Petition for Review
Powell v. SEC
Abolish the Gag Rule
A First Amendment challenge to the SEC’s unconstitutional practice of silencing Americans through settlement gag orders — now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
98%
Of SEC targets settle
1972
Year the gag rule began
50+
Years of compelled silence
9+
Petitioners in the coalition
- The Case
Thomas Joseph Powell, et al. v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
What happens when the government can accuse, publish, and move on, but the person on the other side can never fully answer? That is not balance. That is narrative control.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission can allege wrongdoing, issue a press release, and leave the public with the impression that the matter has been proven. But in many settlements, the individual accepts resolution without adjudication and still remains bound by a gag rule that prevents any real public response. The state gets the microphone. The citizen gets silence.
This case, filed with the New Civil Liberties Alliance, challenges whether the government can require silence in exchange for settlement while retaining full freedom to define what happened. The question has been presented to the Supreme Court of the United States for review.
"No one should have to buy peace by surrendering voice."
Case Details
Status
Active — Petition for Certiorari
Filed
March 16, 2026
Courts
9th Circuit → SCOTUS
Counsel
New Civil Liberties Alliance
Issue
First Amendment / Free Speech
The Gag Rule
Silenced Without a Trial
Since 1972, the SEC’s “no-denial” rule has prohibited individuals who settle from publicly denying the allegations — even if they believe them to be untrue.
The Accusation
The SEC brings enforcement actions alleging fraud or violations and publicly describes those allegations in press releases and regulatory filings.
The Pressure
Individuals face a choice: engage in years of litigation at significant cost, or settle. After four years of inquiry, resolution is offered at the point of maximum pressure.
The Silence
The settlement includes a gag rule. You may not speak about the process. Not to challenge it. Not to explain it. Not even to describe what occurred. The restriction is not mutual.
The modern administrative state rarely censors in the blunt form the First Amendment was designed to prohibit. It operates through leverage, substituting process for prohibition. The government may not do indirectly what it cannot do directly. When an agency can extract a settlement after years of pressure, then permanently restrict public denial while preserving its own ability to shape the narrative, the imbalance becomes systemic rather than incidental.
- Constitutional Foundation
The First Amendment Protects Against Compelled Silence
The First Amendment protects more than speech from prior restraint. It protects against compelled silence when that silence serves as a condition of state action. As James Madison explains in Federalist 51, power expands unless it is checked. That principle does not weaken in administrative settings — it becomes more important.
The question is whether the government can condition the resolution of an investigation on the relinquishment of the rights that allow citizens to challenge the government itself. That question has been presented to the Supreme Court. It is time for the Court to take it and call this what it is: unconstitutional.
The Coalition
Different Facts. Different Cases.
Same Structural Condition.
This is not about one individual. It reflects a broader coalition of respondents who have lived under the same constraint, along with institutional voices defending free speech.
Thomas Joseph Powell
Lead Petitioner
Barry D. Romero
Petitioner
Christopher A. Novinger
Petitioner
Raymond J. Lucia
Petitioner
Cassandra Toroian
Petitioner
Gary Pryor
Petitioner
Joseph Corazzi
Petitioner
Rex Scates
Petitioner
Michelle Silverstein
Petitioner
New Civil Liberties Alliance
Counsel
Reason Foundation
Institutional Voice
Cape Gazette
Institutional Voice
Amicus Support
- Freedom of the Press Foundation
- Cato Institute
- FIRE
- Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute
Get Involved
Your Voice Matters
If you or someone you know has been affected by the SEC’s gag rule, or if you want to stay informed about the progress of this landmark case, we want to hear from you. No action is required — this is simply awareness. But if you prefer to engage, the door is open.