Ice Miller partner Tim Belevetz was featured in the Continuing Education of the Bar article, “Truth Social’s Pay-to-Peek API: Constitutional Claims May Outpace Securities Law.” 
 
The article included: 

Tim Belevetz is co-chair of Ice Miller LLP’s white collar defense & investigations group and an adjunct professor at William & Mary Law School. He told CEB that, technically, insider trading laws may have a blind spot to the type of sneak peek that Truth Social is selling.

Instead, he said the service is more vulnerable, legally, to constitutional challenges, and politically, to media reports questioning if it’s an unlawful advantage for wealthy investors.

“I think the issue here is the perception – it comes across as corrupt,” Belevetz said. “I don’t know that it’s a slam dunk insider trading violation.”

Belevetz said the First Amendment theory is likely the strongest argument to challenge the API, even though the trading advantage it creates for subscribers “doesn’t feel right” due to its potential to influence markets. “Legally, where do things stand from an insider trading standpoint?” he said. “I think it’s a bit more complex.”

Many people tend to think of the First Amendment as simply protecting the right to express ideas, Belevetz explained. “But it’s a lot more than that – the First Amendment also protects access to public information,” he said. Just as the public has a right to court documents, the same goes for the public’s right to hear information that comes from the president.

Everyone should have equal access to the president’s public statements unless there’s a compelling reason for exclusion, Belevetz explained. And even when there is a burden placed on that access, the burdens must be narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest.

“When it comes to the president, members of the public have a right to hear what he says at the same time,” Belevetz said.

Read the full article. Login may be required.