This is historical material “frozen in time”. The website is no longer updated and links to external websites and some internal pages may not work.
We the people ask the federal government to Take or explain a position on an issue or policy:

Does the federal government think the S.E.C.'s property qualifications in Rule 501(a) are constitutional?

Created by C.M. on September 21, 2016

MORELLO V. WHITE ET AL (2:16-cv-04440) is a class action lawsuit against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission alleging the agency crafted an unconstitutional regulation - the Accredited Investor Definition in Rule 501(a). My position is that property qualifications are unconstitutional, unethical, and immoral.

The Accredited Definition creates a property qualification that denies most Americans the right and opportunity to invest in start-up companies (i.e. the reason Kick-starter couldn't offer the public equity in Oculus Rift - just promotional hats). "Interestingly [China's] limits on who qualifies as an Accredited Investor are almost identical to [US Law]."

If you agree that property qualifications have no place in American law - please sign.

Learn More: Morellovwhite.org

Civil Rights & Equality
Return to top