After striking down a ruling early this year that require publicly traded American companies to reveal as whether or not their products consist of conflict materials from Central Africa, a federal court of appeals may have second thoughts on the decision made.
The SEC’s “conflict minerals” rule imposed obligations for companies in the utilization of gold, tin, tungsten, and tantalum linked to armed conflicts within the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
A panel of judges of the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit earlier this year maintained a majority of the regulation, but made a ruling indicating that the disclosure requirement is in violation of the First Amendment since it forces companies to reveal the “blood on its hands.”
The results was observed to be a huge boost on SEC’s conflict minerals case. Early this week, the court of appeals indicated it would now make a reconsideration of the minerals rule.
The aim of the regulations is to prevent violence by forcing companies to avoid the use of conflict minerals.