Poorly written and ill-conceived laws become tools of vindictiveness and oppression.
Did anybody read Scalias’ and Thomas’ dissenting opinions?
Sarbanes-Oxley is actually very well constructed and applies to businesses that are PUBLICLY TRADED and regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. . . and the officers and top management in trusted positions of said companies. Sarbanes-Oxley does not apply to privately held companies, small businesses, individuals, or companies not regulated by the SEC. The section that was applied against Fisherman John Yates was quite specific in that it was referring to documents and objects relating to FINANCIAL and COMPANY RECORDS, such as books, computer hard drives, emails, flash drives, etc. The destruction of physical evidence of any kind NOT related to such Financial Securities and Exchange Commission violations should NOT be covered by Sarbanes-Oxley prosecution, penalties, or imprisonment. It is my opinion the Supreme Court did not go far enough. . . and rule that the statute was not applicable at all for John Yates and his fishing boat. Unless John Yates was an officer or upper management of a publicly traded corporation subject to SEC regulation, he should never have been under the jurisdiction of any Sarbanes-Oxley provisions at all.
Was John Yates an officer of a publicly traded corporation for fishing? Were the fish integral to the running of the corporate books and financial records? I doubt both of these possibilities.