Call us now:
Is the recent ruling by the US Supreme Court on the Chevron Deference going to have any effect on cybersecurity regulatory compliance in the U.S? While the Chevron deference instructed lower courts to defer to expert Federal agencies in the interpretation of regulation. The reversal passes the baton back to the courts to interpret Federal Regulation.
If one considers the SolarWinds vs. SEC case that is currently working its way through court. While the SEC could have been judge jury and executioner, the case is making its way through the courts and could progress to a trial by jury. Was the same true for the Uber case?
Is it reasonable that courts are the ultimate arbiters of governing congressional law? That Federal Agencies have little to worry about, if ultimately cases are tried in courts and if defendants are offered the choice of being tried by a court of their peers? Examining recent cyber breaches, would it not be appropriate to try these in court to maintain an open and transparent process and trial by peers. That will have little effect on the challenges ahead for CISOs and boards?
In challenging the adoption of Federal cyber regulation while cybersecurity may not be mentioned in the Securities and Exchange Act (neither was crypto). The SEC’s role is to maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets and facilitate capital formation. This relies on the SEC keeping pace with advancements in technology and threats and regulating accordingly. So good luck with fighting that one.
Thoughts?
@Thaddeus Dziekanowski Brian D. McCarthy Rachel V. Rose, JD, MBA
Veritas GRC U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
#cybersecurity #cyberriskmanagement #cyberregulation
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A7214199240472850433