Disparities between Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Statute Can Greatly Impact Claims

摘要

In Digital Realty, the Court was aware of policy issues that would encourage expanding antiretaliation provisions under Dodd-Frank to those who internally report violations. The Court, however, was correct in its ruling, because when a statute is unambiguous, the statute must be interpreted by its plain meaning. Encouraging internal reporting over external reporting of violations is a valid goal in many cases. This, however, is in the purview of Congress, not the courts. The goal of Dodd-Frank is to improve financial stability through accountability and transparency. Encouraging whistleblowing by allowing more people to be able to avail themselves of antiretaliatory protections would likely help that goal. Congress could easily amend the definition of who qualifies as a whistleblower under Dodd-Frank if it so feels. However, until Congress does act, to receive antiretaliation protection for whistleblowing under Dodd-Frank, the violation must be reported to the SEC. This is the case even if the alleged violation was at odds with Sarbanes-Oxley.