He adds: "The more guidance you can provide the people having to apply the statute in identifying covered activity, the better. The ARB's ruling was closer to a bright line for our members, although we don't have that bright line yet, and probably never will have."
Prof. Moberly, however, sees the review board's exclusion of GAAP violations and disclosures of internal-controls violations from the list of Sarbox-covered whistle-blower activities as something that needs a serious review by the appeals court. "This is what people predicted when enforcement of this law was given to the Department of Labor," he says. "That the department could get into the nuances of securities regulation seemed far-fetched."
Reader CommentsDisplaying 1 of 1
Bruce Ades
Nov 14, 2007 1:48 PM ET
Dismayed, but not dissuaded
I do think that Mr. Welch's expertise was helpful & hurtful. I also think there was a lot of sympathy for this small … more
Post a comment | View all comments