Case: 25-7187, 02/17/2026, DktEntry: 37.2, Page 19 of 41
concurrent regulation by the states or other federal regulators such as the Securities and Exchange Commission could lead to “total chaos.” 4 Potential limiting language was stricken from the statute “to assure that Federal preemption is complete.” 120 Cong. Rec. S 30458, 30464 (daily ed. Sept. 9, 1974) (Statement of Sen. Curtis). All commodity futures markets were to be under the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction. The 74 Act “preempt[ed] the field insofar as futures regulation is concerned” such that “if any substantive State law regulating futures trading was contrary to or inconsistent with Federal law, the Federal law would govern.” H.R. Rep. No. 93-1383 (1974) (Conf. Rep.), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2087, 2110-11. C. Congress Reinforced and Clarified the CFTC’s Exclusive Jurisdiction After 1974. Amendments to the CEA between 1978 and 2010 repeatedly reinforced and clarified the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction over futures and options. In the Futures Trading Act of 1978 (“78 Act”), Congress preserved the CFTC’s exclusive authority over futures transactions on CFTC-registered DCMs while clarifying the states’ ability to pursue certain violations of the CEA against actors other than federally regulated exchanges. The 78 Act added a section to the CEA authorizing
4 See Commodity Futures Trading Act of 1974: Hearings Before the S. Comm. on Agric. & Forestry on S. 2485, S. 2578, S. 2837, H.R. 13113, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 685 (1974) (statement of Sen. Clark).
9
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs