As Professor Bainbridge and I predicted, there has been an administrative-law challenge to the SEC's burdensome Dodd-Frank conflict minerals rule, adopted on a 3-2 vote without the sort of cost-benefit analysis required by Business Roundtable. The case is National Association of Manufacturers v. SEC, No. 12-1422 (D.C. Cir.). [Compliance Week; law.com/Corporate Counsel]
NAM, Chamber, challenge Dodd-Frank conflict minerals rule
Related Entries:
- Dodd-Frank, Lew, and Too Big to Fail
- New Podcast: What's wrong with Dodd-Frank?
- Government-Sanctioned Credit Ratings
- Today's NLRB Decision Casts a Shadow over the CFPB
- DC Circuit strikes NLRB recess appointments
- Class action settlements in the news
- Government's Entanglement with Credit Ratings
- Zywicki on Skeel on Dodd-Frank
- The CFTC's Victorious Day in Court
- The Reluctant Regulator
- Harvey Pitt on the future of the SEC
- Chairman Schapiro's Troubled Tenure at the SEC
- Persistent Lack of Deliberation by the CFTC
- Interpreting the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
- The latest CFTC rulemaking challenge
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




Leave a comment
Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.
The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.