On September 24, 2020, WLF asked the Supreme Court to review, and ultimately to vacate, a Second Circuit decision in a securities class action with far-reaching implications. Under Supreme Court precedent, a defendant can rebut the presumption of class-wide reliance in a securities class action by showing that an alleged misrepresentation did not actually affect the stock’s market price. The Supreme Court has also made clear that a defendant is entitled to rebut the reliance presumption at the class-certification stage. The Second Circuit violated those rules in this case. Holding that such an inquiry would necessarily reach the merits of materiality, the appeals court barred the defendant from being able to rebut price impact by pointing to the generic nature of the alleged misstatements (e.g., Goldman Sachs’s aspirational mission statement). As WLF contends in its amicus brief, that decision, if left to stand, would undermine Congress’s intent to limit the proliferation of meritless securities class actions. WLF’s amicus brief was prepared with the pro bono assistance of Lyle Roberts and Daniel Sachs at Shearman & Sterling LLP.