CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Federal Trade Commission: Difference between revisions
m
Text replacement - "Reuters" to "Reuters"
m (Text replacement - "Reuters" to "Reuters") |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
In the mid-1990s, the FTC launched the fraud sweeps concept where the agency and its federal, state, and local partners filed simultaneous legal actions against multiple telemarketing fraud targets. The first sweeps operation was ''Project Telesweep'' in July 1995 which cracked down on 100 business opportunity scams.<ref>{{cite web |date=July 18, 1995 |title=Business Opportunity Scam "Epidemic" |url=http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/franchise/tsweep01.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070310140931/http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/franchise/tsweep01.htm |archive-date=March 10, 2007 |access-date=August 14, 2012 |publisher=Ftc.gov}}</ref>{{Secondary source needed|date=August 2024}} | In the mid-1990s, the FTC launched the fraud sweeps concept where the agency and its federal, state, and local partners filed simultaneous legal actions against multiple telemarketing fraud targets. The first sweeps operation was ''Project Telesweep'' in July 1995 which cracked down on 100 business opportunity scams.<ref>{{cite web |date=July 18, 1995 |title=Business Opportunity Scam "Epidemic" |url=http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/franchise/tsweep01.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070310140931/http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/franchise/tsweep01.htm |archive-date=March 10, 2007 |access-date=August 14, 2012 |publisher=Ftc.gov}}</ref>{{Secondary source needed|date=August 2024}} | ||
In the 2021 [[United States Supreme Court]] case, ''[[AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC]]'', the Court found unanimously that the FTC did not have power under {{UnitedStatesCodeSub|15|53|b}} of the FTC Act, amended in 1973, to seek equitable relief in courts; it had the power to seek only injunctive relief.<ref>{{cite web|last=Hurley|first=Lawrence|date=April 22, 2021|title=U.S. Supreme Court curbs FTC's power to recoup ill-gotten gains|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-supreme-court-curbs-ftcs-power-recoup-ill-gotten-gains-2021-04-22/|publisher= | In the 2021 [[United States Supreme Court]] case, ''[[AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC]]'', the Court found unanimously that the FTC did not have power under {{UnitedStatesCodeSub|15|53|b}} of the FTC Act, amended in 1973, to seek equitable relief in courts; it had the power to seek only injunctive relief.<ref>{{cite web|last=Hurley|first=Lawrence|date=April 22, 2021|title=U.S. Supreme Court curbs FTC's power to recoup ill-gotten gains|url=https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/us-supreme-court-curbs-ftcs-power-recoup-ill-gotten-gains-2021-04-22/|publisher=Reuters|access-date=April 22, 2021}}</ref> | ||
In 2023, [[Project 2025]] suggested that an administration could abolish the FTC.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Elliott |first=Vittoria |date=August 1, 2024 |title=What Project 2025 Means for Big Tech … and Everyone Else |url=https://www.wired.com/story/project-2025-tech-industry/ |access-date=2024-08-04 |magazine=Wired |language=en-US |issn=1059-1028 |quote=And though some conservatives have railed against the dominance of Big Tech, Project 2025 also suggests that a second Trump administration could abolish the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which currently has the power to enforce antitrust laws.}}</ref> | In 2023, [[Project 2025]] suggested that an administration could abolish the FTC.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Elliott |first=Vittoria |date=August 1, 2024 |title=What Project 2025 Means for Big Tech … and Everyone Else |url=https://www.wired.com/story/project-2025-tech-industry/ |access-date=2024-08-04 |magazine=Wired |language=en-US |issn=1059-1028 |quote=And though some conservatives have railed against the dominance of Big Tech, Project 2025 also suggests that a second Trump administration could abolish the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which currently has the power to enforce antitrust laws.}}</ref> | ||
| Line 151: | Line 151: | ||
(chair) | (chair) | ||
| style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | | style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | ||
| | |Democratic | ||
|Legal scholar | |Legal scholar | ||
|[[Williams College]] ([[Bachelor of Arts|BA]]) | |[[Williams College]] ([[Bachelor of Arts|BA]]) | ||
| Line 161: | Line 161: | ||
![[Rebecca Slaughter]] | ![[Rebecca Slaughter]] | ||
| style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | | style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | ||
| | |Democratic | ||
|Legal advisor to Senator [[Chuck Schumer]] | |Legal advisor to Senator [[Chuck Schumer]] | ||
|[[Yale University]] (BA) | |[[Yale University]] (BA) | ||
| Line 171: | Line 171: | ||
![[Alvaro Bedoya]] | ![[Alvaro Bedoya]] | ||
| style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | | style="background-color:{{party color|Democratic Party (US)}}" | | ||
| | |Democratic | ||
|Director of the [[Center on Privacy and Technology]] at the [[Georgetown University Law Center]] | |Director of the [[Center on Privacy and Technology]] at the [[Georgetown University Law Center]] | ||
|[[Harvard College]] (BA) | |[[Harvard College]] (BA) | ||