How is the case of S.E.C. vs. Rorech significant in analyzing the effort put forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission in prosecuting culprits of insider trading?
You should probably shorten “the effort put forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission” to “the S.E.C.’s effort” just because the question becomes really bulky and hard to read when it’s spread out like that.
Another thing, you’re question seems easy to answer. The case would be important because the SEC isn’t a big fan of inside traders, so they sued whoever Rorech is. I’m probably misinterpreting your question, so I’m going to suggest you reword it to cause less confusion. I basically understood this question as, “Why is the case of SEC vs Rorech important?”
Omar did a nice job of boiling your question down to its essentials. Maybe you should build into your question some of the argument over the relative importance of the case? I’m just making this up, as I don’t know anything about the case, but your question would work better if it was something like this, “Why is the SEC vs. Rorech case the most important case relating to insider trading in the past 10 years?” Or maybe simply, “How significant is the SEC vs. Rorech case in the government’s efforts to stem the flow of insider trading?” Answering that question would then be a qualitative matter (you’d place it on a spectrum of importance in which you compare it to other efforts).
You must be logged in to post a comment.