6
will be created which will lead to devastating consequences for the financial markets and for anyone who tries to plan for their retirement, including California’s public school teachers. CalSTRS respectfully suggests that the decision of the Eighth Circuit should be reversed.
III.
ARGUMENT
A. THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE SHOULD GOVERN
Section 10(b)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 makes it unlawful for "any person, directly or indirectly, ¯.. [t]o use or employ, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.., any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of[Rule lOb-5]." 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b).
The language of the statute governs the Court’s interpretation. Central Bank, N.A. v. First Interstate Bank, N.A., 511 U.S. 164, 173 (1994) (in determining the scope of conduct prohibited by § 10b "the text of the statute controls our decision[ ]... our cases considering the scope of conduct prohibited by 10(b) in private suits have emphasized adherence to the statutory language, '[t]he starting point in every case involving construction of a statute.'") (quoting Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder, 425 U.S. 185,197 (1976)).
In enacting the Securities Exchange Act, Congress predicated liability on the violation of "such rules and regulations as the [Securities and Exchange] Commission may prescribe as necessary or appropriate in the public
