Judge doesn’t like Elon Musk settlement with SEC, but says court can’t block it

法官对埃隆·马斯克与美国证券交易委员会（SEC）的和解协议表示不满，但称法院无权阻止

A federal judge reluctantly approved a $1.5 million settlement between Elon Musk and the Trump administration despite raising numerous concerns about a deal that lets Musk get off lightly for a rule violation that allegedly harmed Twitter investors. 一位联邦法官勉强批准了埃隆·马斯克与特朗普政府之间 150 万美元的和解协议。尽管法官对该协议提出了诸多质疑，认为马斯克因违规行为而受到的处罚过轻，且该行为据称损害了推特（Twitter）投资者的利益。

In an order approving the deal, US District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan said she “has significant misgivings about the settlement” between Musk and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and described “red flags” in the SEC’s decision-making. This isn’t surprising given that she previously questioned whether the deal is tainted by corruption. 在批准该协议的命令中，美国地区法官斯帕克尔·苏克纳南（Sparkle Sooknanan）表示，她对马斯克与美国证券交易委员会（SEC）之间的和解协议“存有重大疑虑”，并指出 SEC 在决策过程中存在“危险信号”。鉴于她此前曾质疑该协议是否受到腐败影响，这一表态并不令人意外。

But there is a high legal bar for rejecting the settlement, and the circumstances do not meet “that high threshold,” she wrote yesterday. “That means that this Court must accept the Parties’ consent judgment,” Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, wrote. “Whether the Executive Branch (through the SEC) has done enough to hold Mr. Musk to account for his alleged violation is, like many other issues, for our citizenry to decide at the ballot box.” 但她昨日写道，驳回和解协议的法律门槛很高，而目前的情况并未达到“这一高门槛”。“这意味着本法院必须接受双方的同意判决，”由拜登任命的苏克纳南写道，“行政部门（通过 SEC）是否已采取足够措施让马斯克先生为其涉嫌违规的行为负责，就像许多其他问题一样，应由我们的公民在投票箱前做出决定。”

The settlement ends a lawsuit the Biden-era SEC filed after Musk purchased a 9 percent stake in Twitter in 2022 and failed to disclose it within 10 days as required under US law. The SEC investigated for nearly three years and finally sued Musk in January 2025, in US District Court for the District of Columbia, just before Biden left the White House. 该和解协议终结了一起诉讼。此前，马斯克于 2022 年收购了推特 9% 的股份，但未按美国法律要求在 10 天内披露。拜登政府时期的 SEC 在调查近三年后，于 2025 年 1 月（即拜登卸任前夕）在哥伦比亚特区联邦地区法院起诉了马斯克。

The lawsuit alleged that by not disclosing the stock purchases before the legal deadline, Musk was able to keep buying shares at artificially low prices and underpay Twitter investors by at least $150 million for those shares. Musk went on to buy the entire company later in 2022. 诉讼指控称，由于未在法定截止日期前披露股票购买情况，马斯克得以继续以人为压低的价格购买股票，从而使推特投资者在这些股份上至少损失了 1.5 亿美元。马斯克随后在 2022 年晚些时候收购了整家公司。

“Elon Musk, the richest person in the world with a net worth close to $1 trillion, allegedly ignored his obligation to file SEC disclosures at the expense of other investors to the tune of $150 million,” Sooknanan wrote yesterday. “That is why the SEC previously sought disgorgement from Mr. Musk in the ballpark of $150 million. So the $1.5 million penalty in the consent judgment, though touted as the largest in the SEC’s history, is around 1 percent of the total amount of money that was potentially at stake in this case.” “埃隆·马斯克，这位身价近 1 万亿美元的世界首富，据称无视其提交 SEC 披露文件的义务，导致其他投资者损失了 1.5 亿美元，”苏克纳南昨日写道。“这就是为什么 SEC 此前曾寻求从马斯克那里追缴约 1.5 亿美元的非法所得。因此，同意判决中 150 万美元的罚款，尽管被吹捧为 SEC 历史上最高额的罚款，但仅占本案潜在涉案金额的 1% 左右。”

Musk can keep “unjust” profits

马斯克可以保留“不义之财”

Musk was accused of violating Section 13(d), which is enforced under a “strict liability” standard. That means it doesn’t matter whether a rule violation was intentional or inadvertent. The Trump SEC and Musk agreed to a settlement in which a trust in Musk’s name would pay a $1.5 million civil penalty to the government. A settlement term prohibiting future violations of the disclosure law would be imposed on the trust instead of Musk himself, and the trust and Musk did not admit to any wrongdoing. 马斯克被指控违反了第 13(d) 条款，该条款在“严格责任”标准下执行。这意味着无论违规行为是有意还是无意，都不影响定性。特朗普政府时期的 SEC 与马斯克达成和解，由马斯克名下的一个信托基金向政府支付 150 万美元的民事罚款。和解协议中禁止未来违反披露法的条款是针对该信托基金而非马斯克本人，且该信托基金和马斯克均未承认任何不当行为。

It appears that the injunction against future violations “binds Mr. Musk in his capacity as trustee of the Trust,” Sooknanan wrote. However, the consent decree naming the trust instead of Musk “allow[s] Mr. Musk to proclaim publicly that he has been cleared of wrongdoing,” she said. 苏克纳南写道，针对未来违规行为的禁令似乎“在马斯克作为信托受托人的身份上对他具有约束力”。然而，她指出，将信托而非马斯克本人列为对象的同意令，“使马斯克能够公开宣称自己已洗清了不当行为”。

The SEC dropped its request for disgorgement of Musk’s unjust enrichment resulting from the violation. That means investors allegedly harmed will not be compensated under this settlement, although Twitter investors who sued Musk over a different violation are seeking an estimated $2.6 billion in damages after a jury ruled that Musk made false statements. SEC 放弃了要求马斯克退还因违规而获得的不当利益的请求。这意味着受害投资者将无法根据此和解协议获得赔偿，尽管此前因另一项违规行为起诉马斯克的推特投资者，在陪审团裁定马斯克发表虚假陈述后，正在寻求约 26 亿美元的赔偿。

“The SEC has decided not to press for relief that could compensate Mr. Musk’s alleged victims, instead settling on a form of relief that would go into the government’s pocket,” Sooknanan wrote yesterday. The SEC told the court that it originally asked for disgorgement because it “has the statutory authority” to do so but dropped the request because it has not historically obtained disgorgement in this type of case, she wrote. “SEC 已决定不再寻求能够补偿马斯克所谓受害者的救济措施，而是选择了一种将资金收入政府囊中的救济方式，”苏克纳南昨日写道。她写道，SEC 告诉法院，其最初要求退还非法所得是因为它“拥有法定权力”这样做，但后来放弃了该请求，理由是此类案件在历史上从未获得过退还非法所得的判决。

Settlement meets “minimum” standards

和解协议达到“最低”标准

In May, Sooknanan told the SEC and Musk lawyers, “I am not going to rubber-stamp this settlement, and I cannot rubber-stamp this settlement.” She told the sides to provide more information on how the deal was reached and asked whether Musk is “getting some kind of special treatment.” She said in an order that the court must consider whether the settlement “resolves the claims in the complaint, and whether it was tainted by improper collusion or corruption.” 今年 5 月，苏克纳南曾对 SEC 和马斯克的律师表示：“我不会对这份和解协议盖章放行，我也不能盖章放行。”她要求双方提供更多关于协议达成过程的信息，并询问马斯克是否“获得了某种特殊待遇”。她在命令中表示，法院必须考虑该和解协议是否“解决了诉状中的索赔要求，以及它是否受到不正当勾结或腐败的影响”。

Sooknanan said yesterday that the settlement met the “minimum” standards. “A court presented with a consent judgment is not a rubber stamp. But neither is it an ombudsman,” she wrote. “This Court is limited to evaluating whether the proposed consent judgment meets minimum standards of fairness and reasonableness, or whether it instead ‘make[s] a mockery of judicial power.’” 苏克纳南昨日表示，该和解协议达到了“最低”标准。“法院在面对同意判决时，不是橡皮图章。但它也不是监察员，”她写道，“本法院仅限于评估拟议的同意判决是否符合公平和合理的最低标准，或者它是否反而‘嘲弄了司法权力’。”

SEC and Musk lawyers told the court that the deal arose from over a year of negotiations and that both sides gave up something of value in exchange for limiting risks involved in the litigation, Sooknanan wrote. 苏克纳南写道，SEC 和马斯克的律师告诉法院，该协议是经过一年多的谈判达成的，双方都放弃了一些有价值的东西，以换取限制诉讼中涉及的风险。

“This is not to say that this settlement is run-of-the-mill,” she wrote. “The SEC admits that it has never before ‘settled a Section 13(d) violation with a trust without the trustee or beneficiary.’ And the Trust seems like a particularly odd candidate for the SEC to break that new ground—after all, as mentioned, the Trust is a revocable trust with Mr. Musk as its sole trustee and beneficiary.” “这并不是说这份和解协议是普通的，”她写道，“SEC 承认，此前从未有过‘在没有受托人或受益人的情况下，与信托基金就第 13(d) 条款违规行为达成和解’的先例。而该信托基金似乎是一个特别奇怪的、让 SEC 开创这一先例的对象——毕竟，如前所述，该信托是一个可撤销信托，而马斯克本人正是其唯一的受托人和受益人。”

Court must accept deal despite “significant misgivings”

尽管有“重大疑虑”，法院仍必须接受该协议

The SEC told the court that Musk requested having the trust replace him in the settlement, and that the agency agreed as part of a compromise. “The Court is left to wonder whether the SEC will afford other alleged securities-law violators such solicitude,” Sooknanan wrote. “Or is this a one-time deal designed for Mr. Musk negotiated without the involvement of the SEC lawyers litigating this case?” SEC 告诉法院，是马斯克要求由信托基金代替他进行和解，而该机构作为妥协的一部分同意了这一要求。“法院不禁怀疑，SEC 是否也会对其他涉嫌违反证券法的人给予这种关照，”苏克纳南写道，“还是说这是一次专门为马斯克设计的、在没有负责本案诉讼的 SEC 律师参与下达成的特殊交易？”

However, Sooknanan said this does not “render the proposed consent judgment unfair or unreasonable under the law.” 然而，苏克纳南表示，这并不“导致拟议的同意判决在法律上变得不公平或不合理”。