No. 22-660October Term 2023Decided Feb 8, 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
- 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.
Documents
Related cases




Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary-source trail available.
- Note
- Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Mar 30, 2026
- Method
- Methodology
Primary materials8
Supreme Court docket 22-660
docket | Mar 30, 2026
Primary case document
Supreme Court document | Mar 30, 2026
CourtListener docket record
docket | Mar 30, 2026
Questions Presented
brief | Mar 8, 2026
Murray
opinion | Feb 8, 2024
opinion
opinion | Feb 8, 2024
Petition
brief | Jan 13, 2023
Lower Court Orders/Opinions
order | Nov 11, 2022