| Go-To Guide: |
|
On Aug. 21, 2025, Judge Margaret Ryan, a former senior judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, was named the Securities and Exchange Commission’s director of the Division of Enforcement. Some former Enforcement Division directors have made public statements shortly after their appointment, laying out their expected approach to federal securities law enforcement, to interactions with the defense bar, and their expected areas of priority for the Division during their tenure. Judge Ryan did not—until Feb. 11, 2026, when she made her first public remarks at the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s 56th Annual Securities Regulation Seminar, in a speech that focused on “principles, process, and priorities.”
Principles
With respect to principles, Judge Ryan emphasized “integrity, honor, fidelity to the law, and an unwavering commitment to the fair and judicious use of the formidable power and resources [of] the federal government.” She also addressed criticisms of the Division of Enforcement under the prior administration, some of which, she said, were “valid and warranted course correction.” However, Judge Ryan also said she would not allow the Division to be “weighed down by criticism that is misinformed, has been remedied, or only exists as historical artifact.”
Process
With respect to process, Judge Ryan stated a desire to provide a “transparent and appropriate process” to individuals and companies under SEC investigation, emphasizing the importance of a robust Wells process. The SEC’s Wells process is a formal procedure by which the SEC provides notice to individuals and entities under SEC investigation of its intent to seek the Commission’s authorization to file an enforcement action, and by which such individuals and entities (potential respondents) can respond to the SEC’s “Wells Notice” by presenting information and evidence they believe are in their favor and that the Enforcement staff and the Commission should consider before an action is filed. Potential respondents are also often granted a meeting with the Enforcement staff, called a “Wells meeting,” at which they may try to persuade the staff not to bring an action, present mitigating factors, or propose a resolution.
Judge Ryan announced the following regarding the Wells process:
- Where potential respondents previously had two weeks to respond to a Wells Notice, they now will have four weeks to respond;
- Both the staff and the Commission will carefully review Wells submissions by potential respondents; and
- A member of the “enforcement senior leadership team” will attend every Wells meeting. While Judge Ryan did not specify who amongst senior Enforcement leadership would attend such meetings, it may mean that she will attend, along with the appropriate deputy and/or associate director or unit chief supervising the case.
However, Judge Ryan also stated that “fairness” is not “weakness,” and that “deliberate circumvention of the [Wells] process,” including prolonging an investigation while also complaining about the length of that investigation, would be viewed unfavorably.
Enforcement Priorities
Judge Ryan also set forth the SEC’s enforcement priorities under Chairman Paul Atkins, emphasizing a return “to the basics, with fairness and a focus on timely resolution of cases” and the “quality and impact” of enforcement cases over quantity. Consistent with prior remarks by Chairman Atkins, Judge Ryan stated that the Division would focus on fraud on retail investors, “mak[ing] full use of the remedies available to return money to investors harmed by those frauds.” Judge Ryan also stated that the Division would focus on misconduct that “undermines market integrity,” including accounting fraud, insider trading, wash trading, and market manipulation schemes.
Finally, Judge Ryan stated that ensuring compliance with public company reporting, books and records and internal control requirements, and broker-dealer “financial responsibility rules” and investment adviser fiduciary duties is also important in instances where the noncompliance poses a risk to investors or market integrity, or where the participant gained a benefit. Her remarks identified such cases as opportunities to “craft thoughtful resolutions” that “rectify[] the violation or chart[] a firmer path toward compliance,” where “other divisions” of the SEC might help “people and entities remediate the problem or deficiency.”
Conclusion
Judge Ryan’s first public remarks as director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement offered insight into her views on the appropriate direction of the Division during her tenure and her enforcement priorities, which, consistent with prior remarks by Chairman Atkins, identified retail investor fraud, accounting fraud, insider trading, and market manipulation as areas of focus. Her statements also indicate a focus on compliance and reporting failures that might threaten market integrity or risk investor harm, and a willingness to work with potential respondents to craft “thoughtful resolutions” to perceived compliance failures, which might indicate openness to considering proposed compliance consultants, monitors, and self-imposed remedial steps when resolving investigations.