The recent Supreme Court challenge to administrative law judges in SEC v. Jarkesy marks a significant stride towards fairness and equity within the U.S. economy, particularly benefiting minority-owned businesses.
Administrative law judges, appointed by agency leaders, preside over tribunals that the agencies self-run, creating inherent conflicts of interest. This arrangement, especially evident under administrations like the Trump-era Federal Trade Commission and Department of Commerce, can result in biased decisions that disadvantage vulnerable populations.
In contrast, the Seventh Amendment guarantees jury trials to prevent consolidated power and ensure diverse community representation. Unlike administrative law judges, juries incorporate varied perspectives, including racial diversity, which enhances deliberations, accuracy, and fairness.
Recent studies show that, because of their diverse racial and ethnic composition, juries spend more time debating and reviewing data and evidence. They are also more accurate overall.
This inclusivity is not merely a moral imperative but also a pragmatic business strategy, as recognized by the 80% of U.S. employers who have adopted Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies for enhanced decision-making precision. Mark Cuban recently echoed this sentiment on X, writing, “I know it’s a positive because I see its impact on bottom lines.”.
Administrative law judges often reflect a singular political viewpoint, evident in skewed outcomes compared to federal courts. For example, the Federal Trade Commission seldom loses cases in its internal court, and when it has lost, its commissioners have often overturned them. Yet, at the same time, the FTC faces significant challenges in federal settings. The sharp contrast of how frequently the FTC succeeds when using its internal court to how often it loses on the federal level is illustrative of the inherent biases that come with utilizing administrative law judges.
Despite encouraging growth, African American-owned businesses remain underrepresented, constituting only 3% of U.S. firms and 1% of revenue, despite comprising 15% of the population. Political reliance on administrative law judges and other restrictive mechanisms stifles diverse viewpoints critical to addressing this disparity.
The Supreme Court's decision in SEC v. Jarkesy represents a crucial step towards fostering a more equitable economic landscape. While more reforms are needed to safeguard minority interests fully, this ruling signifies progress towards a legal system that respects and empowers all Americans, irrespective of background or affiliation.
Lisa L. Cole Martin is an Adjunct Instructor at North Carolina A&T State University, a public, historically black, land-grant research university in Greensboro, North Carolina.