Brief Fact Summary. This case was appealed after the SEC reconsidered the same plan from Chenery I, and again rejected it.
Synopsis of Rule of Law.
Issue. Was the Commission’s action in again outlawing petitioners’ purchases of stocks, considered in the light of the Supreme Court’s opinion, a permissible exercise of administrative discretion?
Held. No. The Commission’s action cannot be sustained on that ground. The Commission’s position amounted to nothing more than saying that purchasing shares of company stock during reorganization is unlawful, without any regard to any other factors or good or bad faith. This is precisely what the Supreme Court said not to do. The Commission cannot apply a standard which it has never promulgated. Dissent. None. Concurrence. None.
Discussion. The Commission’s position goes beyond the mere question of the necessity of a rule to insisting an absolute right to approve in one case, and disapprove in another.