Skip to main content

No. 22-660October Term 2023Decided Feb 8, 2024

Docket 22-660October Term 2023 (2023–2024)

Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC

The Supreme Court ruled that a whistleblower suing under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act does not need to prove that their employer acted with "retaliatory intent" or animus to succeed on a claim.

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Feb 8, 2024
Case Accepted
Arguments HeardOct 10, 2023
Decision ReleasedFeb 8, 2024
What it's about

The Supreme Court ruled that a whistleblower suing under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act does not need to prove that their employer acted with "retaliatory intent" or animus to succeed on a claim. Instead, the employee must only demonstrate that their protected whistleblowing activity was a "contributing factor" in the adverse employment action taken against them.

Question presented

Under 18 U.S.C. § 1514A, must a whistleblower prove his employer acted with “retaliatory intent” as part of his case in chief?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / Decision released Feb 8, 2024

Area

Decided Supreme Court case

Timing

Decided February 8, 2024

The Court released its decision 121 days after oral argument on October 10, 2023. The median for cases argued in October is 138 days.

Based on 28 merits cases argued in October since 1995.Argument and decision days