Supreme Amnesia: The Shifting Standards for Fraud-on-the-Market Class Certification
Key Finding
The Supreme Court has offered inconsistent and illogical requirements for class certification in securities litigation
Abstract
In a series of cases, beginning with Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., 563 U.S. 804 (2011), and concluding with Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, 594 U.S. 113 (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court has offered shifting and conflicting understandings of the fraud-on-the-market presumption and its role in class certification. The confusion has filtered down to the lower courts, where class certification determinations have become wide-ranging inquiries into the merits, untethered from the fundamental question whether class treatment is appropriate. This Essay, written for the ILEP 30 th Anniversary of the PSLRA Symposium, explores how the Supreme Court has created an impossible class certification maze for parties to navigate, and recommends that courts no longer adjudicate fraud-on-the-market at class certification.
Published in
© Ann Lipton, 2026
All rights reserved. Distributed for discussion purposes only; not to be reproduced without permission.
The views expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of ECGI or its members.
For copyright queries or takedown requests, contact wp@ecgi.org.