Acting FTC President Rebecca Kelly Slaughter blamed the ruling, saying it had deprived the FTC of its strongest tools to help consumers.
“The Supreme Court ruled against fraudulent artists and dishonest companies by allowing ordinary Americans to pay for illegal behavior,” she said. That we could have made the consumer all wrong. ”
Parliament’s response: FTC Leader It has warned that consumers will suffer if the Supreme Court abolishes the agency’s ability to seek financial penalties.
“The enforcement action will slow and the amendments for consumers will dry up if Congress does not act swiftly to assert our full powers under 13 (b),” Slaughter said in a Senate hearing on Tuesday.
Congress is considering legislation to amend the Supreme Court ruling. The House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee has scheduled a hearing next week on whether the FTC needs new powers to seek consumer fixes. The Supreme Court case is also the subject of the FTC hearing in the Senate this week.
“We have to do everything we can to protect this authority and, if necessary, pass new laws to do so,” Senate Commerce Chairman Maria Cantwell (D-Wash) said at the same Tuesday hearing.
case: The agency has used 13 (b) for decades to force companies to reimburse consumers who have been hurt. But the appeals court recently raised questions about that power.
In a pre-Supreme Court case, the FTC sued AMG Capital Management, a fast money lender run by former racing driver Scott Tucker, on charges of misleading consumers about terms of short-term and high-interest loans. The sentencing court ordered AMG and Tucker to pay $ 1.3 billion in restitution to consumers, an order held on the appeal.Amg then asked a Supreme Court judge to weigh in on the FTC’s power.
Cristiano Lima Contribute to this report