SEC Commissioner Roel C. Campos made a speech today, and part of it addressed the subpoenas issued to the media.
Given the level of twisting in the NY press that Cox's comments have received, I thought it was telling how the Commission actually views things. This speaks for itself, so no bunny commentary is necessary...
"Subpoenas on Journalists
There has been much in the news lately about the subject of the SEC serving subpoenas on journalist, including subpoenas to two Dow Jones and TheStreet.com columnists in connection with a market manipulation investigation. While I will not comment directly on any on-going investigation, I feel it appropriate to make a few comments about our Agency's procedures in this area. Earlier this week, our Chairman issued a statement in which he pointed out that he and Commissioners were not informed of the subpoenas issued by the SEC's San Francisco's office in this case. Yesterday, Thursday, the Agency also announced that it will develop clear guidelines regarding the issuance of subpoenas to journalists during fraud investigations. In my view these statements have been incorrectly interpreted in the media and in the public to indicate that our Enforcement Staff did something wrong. In other words, our Staff, in my opinion, seems to have gotten "a bum rap."
First, in case anyone here didn't already know this, I offer that the SEC's Enforcement Staff is by far one of the most professional, competent, and reasonable in the world. I have been associated or worked with many and I feel I have a sound perspective to say that.
Like the rest of our Agency, the mission of our Enforcement Division is straight forward: to protect American investors from fraud by enforcing federal securities laws. The Division has long established, carefully developed practices for conducting civil discovery. For example, counsel for individuals or entities as a practice are notified well in advance, before any request or subpoena is issued. In many cases, discovery is worked out on a voluntary basis with private counsel. In some cases, because of organizational needs to record the request, subpoenas or formal discovery requests are actually requested by the party. Our Enforcement staff as a matter of professional policy and cultural DNA seeks to conduct its investigations and discovery in a manner respectful of all subjects and third parties, not just journalists. As a matter of course, in seeking discovery, our staff makes all efforts to exhaust all sources of information before resorting to formal process or subpoenas. The Agency has a long history of very cooperative and respectful dealings with the press in matters involving discovery and subpoenas. Any disputes regarding privileges, as a matter of course, are sought to be resolved informally and, ultimately, through the courts if agreements cannot be worked out through counsel.
From my perspective, the announcement yesterday that new guidelines will be worked out with the staff and the Commission as to the issuance of subpoenas to journalists should not be interpreted to mean that no guidelines were in place or that our staff committed any errors. As our Chairman has also clearly stated, this effort does not signal in any way any retreat from aggressive enforcement of securities laws in this particular case or any case. Our Agency, of course, prides itself in constantly seeking to do better in accomplishing its mission.
Finally, it goes without saying, no one is above the law. If in any matter it is important for the integrity of the investigation to enforce a subpoena, it will be done through appropriate legal process of the federal court system, without hesitation. Of course any privilege or constitutional rights will be taken into account as a matter of due process."