Securities Fraud & Insider Trading

On June 10, 2026, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking public comment on amendments to CFTC Regulation 40.11 and the addition of a new Appendix F to part 40, addressing event contracts, commonly traded on so-called “prediction markets.” The proposal would specify which event contracts may be subject to a determination that they are contrary to the public interest, set out the factors the Commission would apply, and add a definition of “gaming” together with a rule for when an event contract “involves” an underlying activity.

Amid recent high-profile incidents of suspicious activity on prediction markets, as well as pressure from Congress, the CFTC has signaled in unmistakable terms that prediction markets are squarely within its enforcement crosshairs and that it will use every tool at its disposal—including artificial intelligence surveillance.

In April 2026, U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke was charged for allegedly profiting over $400,000 on bets placed on an offshore cryptocurrency-based prediction platform using classified information related to a military operation targeting former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The prosecution of Van Dyke reflected the government’s position that prediction markets are subject to the Commodity Exchange Act’s (CEA) anti-fraud and insider trading prohibitions.

Less than six weeks later, federal prosecutors have filed a second insider trading claim involving prediction markets–this time alleging use of confidential corporate data on Polymarket, the world’s largest online prediction marketplace.

We just released Episode 42 of the False Claims Act Insights podcast where Tim Ribelin and I discussed managed care FCA enforcement.

Tim recently discussed this topic at an American Conference Institute conference. Our listeners now get to hear Tim’s takes on “one way” or “add-only” chart reviews, and how aggressive documentation templates create FCA

The prediction market industry has spent the better part of two years arguing that event contracts are a legitimate, regulated, and economically valuable financial product—and, in important respects, that argument has prevailed. What the industry could not have anticipated is that its first landmark enforcement action involves not a rogue trader on Wall Street but an active-duty U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant accused of leveraging classified intelligence about a covert military operation to pocket more than $400,000 on an offshore cryptocurrency-based prediction platform.

We just released Episode 41 of the False Claims Act Insights podcast where I discussed the often ignored but critical issue of relators’ attorneys’ fee petitions. Relators often claim millions of dollars of fees at the end of False Claims Act settlements, and some are shocked to learn that federal law requires the party settling

How AI-Powered Attacks, Supply Chain Vulnerabilities, and Regulatory Pressures Are Shaping Cybersecurity Today

In today’s digital-first world, cybersecurity has never been more crucial. Organizations across every industry face a rapidly changing threat landscape, with data breaches growing in frequency and sophistication. Modern attackers leverage advancements in technology, particularly artificial intelligence (AI), to launch innovative campaigns that challenge traditional defenses. At the same time, supply chain vulnerabilities and increased regulatory scrutiny are raising the stakes for organizations.

The Supreme Court recently and unanimously held in Ellingburg v. United States[1] that restitution imposed under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA) qualifies as “criminal punishment” subject to the Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause. While this narrow ruling only prohibits restitution judgments for convictions that predate the MVRA, Justice Clarence Thomas authored a concurrence advocating for a more expansive view of the Ex Post Facto Clause that reaches nominally civil as well as criminal laws.

We just released Episode 38 of the False Claims Act Insights podcast where I discussed DOJ’s dismissal process under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(A) with Husch Blackwell’s Tanner Cook. Tanner tells us about how DOJ substantially increased the number of qui tams that they affirmatively dismissed in 2025 and how DOJ analysis of qui tam

We just released Episode 37 of the False Claims Act Insights podcast, in which I discuss the DOJ’s announcement that it received a record number of qui tams in 2025, together with Husch Blackwell partner Cormac Connor. Cormac also shares recent statements from a senior DOJ official revealing the DOJ’s False Claims Act priorities