Following the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that the FTC had been incorrectly wielding its power concerning Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, it appeared that the FTC’s power to inflict monetary damages without first subjecting themselves to the administrative processes found in Section 5 of the FTC Act would be limited.

The Supreme Court’s AMG Capital decision prevented the FTC from seeking monetary relief in court under Section 13(b). But the recent Neora decision confirms the FTC still has significant power under Section 13(b) that can be used to cause direct sellers a lot of pain in a court of law.

In a unanimous court decision, the Supreme Court announced that Section 13(b) of the FTC Act does not authorize the FTC “to seek, or a court to award, equitable monetary relief such as restitution or disgorgement.” The ruling does affirm that the FTC can seek monetary relief, but it must first invoke “its administrative procedures […]