Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump both alluded to the income gap. In spite of that condition a court was responsible for this outcome regarding overturning a 2012 insider trading conviction involving hedge fund traders Chiasson and Newman
In the decision last year, the Second Circuit overturned two convictions, saying prosecutors based their case on insufficient evidence that stretched the limits of the law too far. The ruling set a higher standard for proving the financial crime: prosecutors must prove traders knew that the person who provided an inside tip gained at least the potential of a tangible reward in exchange, saying circumstantial evidence wasn’t good enough to clear the key threshold of showing a fiduciary breach.
The opinion was significant enough to get this response from Obama :
Updated July 30, 2015 7:07 p.m. ET
The Obama administration on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to review a controversial decision by a federal appeals court that prosecutors say will make it harder for them to win insider trading cases.
The court narrowing the conditions for conviction contrasts the intent of the law passed in 1933 in response to the crash of 29.