Apr 112024

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Stays Climate Disclosure Rule

Sonia Gupta Barros, Samuel B. Boxerman, Heather M. Palmer and Aaron L. Flyer
,

On Thursday, April 4, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission or SEC) issued an order staying its March 6, 2024, Final Rules — The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors, Rel. Nos. 33-11275, 34-99678 (Mar. 6, 2024), 89 Fed. Reg. 21,668 (Mar. 28, 2024). As discussed in detail in Sidley’s March 12, 2024, alert here, the Final Rules require domestic and foreign registrants to include extensive climate-related information in public securities filings.

Following a challenge to the Final Rules on March 8, 2024, the Fifth Circuit issued an administrative stay on March 15, 2024, pending judicial review. Thereafter, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated the Fifth Circuit challenge with a number of other pending challenges across the country in the Eighth Circuit, which resulted in the Fifth Circuit’s dissolving its initial administrative stay. Given that challengers were poised to file another motion for an administrative stay pending judicial review, the Commission, upon its own discretion, has now decided to voluntarily stay the Final Rules pending judicial review.

In doing so, the Commission signaled that while it intends to “continue vigorously defending the Final Rules’ validity in court,” it found that a stay is appropriate in light of the procedural complexities associated with managing and consolidating the large number of pending challenges to the Final Rules as well as the regulatory uncertainty that would result for affected stakeholders that may become subject to the Final Rules’ requirements while challenging the validity of the Rules themselves. From the Commission’s perspective, a stay may avoid litigation over procedural issues and keep the focus of forthcoming litigation on the merits of the Final Rules. There was no mention of changes in compliance dates in the SEC’s order; thus it is not clear whether current compliance deadlines will be extended once the litigation is resolved. Given the extensive disclosures required by the Final Rules, registrants should continue to prepare for compliance as soon as possible.

 

This post is as of the posting date stated above. Sidley Austin LLP assumes no duty to update this post or post about any subsequent developments having a bearing on this post.

Sonia Gupta Barros

Washington, D.C.

sbarros@sidley.com

Samuel B. Boxerman

Washington, D.C.

sboxerman@sidley.com

Heather M. Palmer

Houston

hpalmer@sidley.com

Aaron L. Flyer

Washington, D.C.

aflyer@sidley.com

You might also like
Jarkesy’s Potential Implications for EPA Administrative Proceedings

On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided SEC v. Jarkesy,[1] holding that when the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) alleges a defendant has violated securities antifraud provisions and seeks civil penalties, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial in federal court under the Seventh Amendment. The ruling restricts the SEC’s use of its own in-house administrative tribunal with its own administrative law judges (ALJs), which the SEC has historically used to pursue antifraud claims. While the Court’s ruling focuses on the SEC, the principles underlying the decision may be applied more broadly to restrict the ability of other federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to pursue civil penalties via their own administrative proceedings.

SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosure Rules Ushering in a New Era of Public Company Climate Reporting

On March 6, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted final rules that will require domestic and foreign registrants to include extensive climate-related information in their registration statements and periodic reports.

Federal Court Upholds U.S. Department of Labor ESG Rule

On September 21, 2023, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Texas rejected a challenge by 26 states and upheld the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) rule that permits fiduciaries of plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to consider environmental, social, or governance (ESG) considerations under certain circumstances when making investment decisions. By upholding the rule, the court rejected the states’ contention that by allowing ESG considerations, financial interests would be subordinate to nonpecuniary interests. Stakeholders interested in ESG should continue to track this ruling, which may be appealed.