External Review Recommends Sweeping Changes to FINRA Enforcement Program
On June 30, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) published an outside expert report setting forth significant recommendations for the management, investigation, review, and resolution of enforcement matters. FINRA commissioned the review in July 2025 as part of its FINRA Forward modernization initiative, retaining Professor Paul Eckert of William & Mary Law School and former SEC Commissioner Troy Paredes to evaluate opportunities for “meaningful, common-sense improvements” to FINRA’s enforcement program.
EU Forced Labor Regulation Moves Toward Implementation: How Companies Should Prepare
On June 26, 2026, the European Commission (Commission) published its long-awaited guidelines on the Forced Labor Regulation (FLR). The FLR, which entered into force in December 2024 (see Sidley Update of December 2024) and will apply in full from December 14, 2027, introduces a broad ban on products made, wholly or partly, with forced labor at any stage of the supply chain, regardless of product type, sector, or origin.
HHS-OIG Decertifies New York Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, Escalating Federal Scrutiny of State Medicaid Fraud Enforcement
The Administration has taken another significant step in its effort to increase pressure on state Medicaid Fraud Control Units (“MFCUs”). On July 2, 2026, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York announced the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (“HHS-OIG”) denied recertification of New York’s MFCU and suspended its federal funding effective July 1. The decision follows the Administration’s announcements earlier this year that it would closely scrutinize state MFCU performance, including through funding consequences for states perceived as failing to aggressively investigate and prosecute Medicaid fraud.
In House Hearing, DAAG Jenny Discusses FCA Enforcement Priorities Related to Grants, Faces Questioning on Using FCA to Target Discrimination
On June 24, 2026, the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing on “Federal Research Funds: The False Claims Act’s Role in Combating Grant Fraud.” Brenna Jenny, DOJ’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Commercial Litigation, testified on three FCA enforcement “focus areas” related to federal grants, before responding to questions regarding the use of the statute to target discrimination.
DOJ’s 2026 Health Care Fraud Takedown Highlights Increased Coordination and Data-Driven Enforcement
This week, DOJ announced the results of its 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown, which involved charges against 455 defendants, including 90 medical professionals, in connection with alleged schemes involving more than $6.5 billion in false claims submitted to Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health care programs. The Takedown involved the participation of 50 state Medicaid Fraud Control Units and included cases in 56 federal districts and 45 U.S. states and territories.
DOJ Reaches $507,144 Settlement with Defense Contractor, Signals Increased FCA Scrutiny of Cybersecurity Self-Assessments
On June 18, 2026, DOJ announced a settlement with LOGZONE Inc., a defense contractor, to pay $507,144 to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act through its failure to satisfy cybersecurity requirements in its contracts with the Department of the Navy (“the Navy”). This settlement involves yet another coordinated enforcement effort through the recently created Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, previously reported on here and here. DOJ reached this settlement with assistance from the Department of the Navy, the Department of the Army, and the Defense Contract Management Agency (“DCMA”). This settlement underscores cybersecurity compliance as a focus of FCA enforcement.
New Clarity Emerges on DOJ’s Fraud Enforcement Reorganization
In remarks delivered on June 3, 2026, at the American Conference Institute’s Global Anti-Corruption, Ethics & Compliance Conference in New York City, Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva, the head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Criminal Division, provided the clearest public indication to date of how DOJ intends to divide fraud enforcement responsibilities between the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the newly created National Fraud Enforcement Division (“NFED”).
Under the emerging structure, NFED will focus on government program fraud, i.e., criminal offenses involving public payers and public systems, including taxpayer-funded programs, while the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section will remain focused on private-sector market, consumer, and corporate fraud matters—a traditional strength of the Unit previously known as Market Integrity & Major Frauds, which will remain part of the Criminal Division. Duva further emphasized that the Fraud Section will be focusing on securities and major financial fraud schemes, global fraud, and prediction markets, and is actively looking to further build capacity by hiring talented lawyers.
The remarks largely confirm earlier expectations that DOJ would eventually provide greater clarity regarding the respective roles of the Criminal Division and NFED following NFED’s creation. We examine what Duva’s comments reveal about DOJ’s enforcement priorities, staffing changes, and the implications for future enforcement activity.
Supreme Court Rules for SEC on Disgorgement Awards
In a win for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in Sripetch v. SEC, No. 25-466 (June 4, 2026) that an SEC disgorgement award does not require proof of pecuniary loss by investors. The case involved the new statutory disgorgement remedy (in Exchange Act Section 21(d)(7)) that Congress added in 2021, following the Supreme Court’s decisions in Kokesh and Liu, which together curtailed the SEC’s disgorgement remedy by subjecting it to statutory time limits and equitable constraints.
The practical result is that the SEC will have a somewhat easier time obtaining disgorgement awards in future enforcement cases. But the Supreme Court’s decision explicitly left open a number of interesting questions: whether the equitable constraints identified in Liu apply to the new statutory disgorgement remedy (the Court assumed here that they do), whether disgorgement is available when it is infeasible to distribute funds to investors, and whether the Seventh Amendment jury trial right under Jarkesy is implicated by the disgorgement remedy. How the SEC pursues disgorgement awards going forward may implicate all those questions and lead to future litigation. We’ll be watching closely.
