The U.S. Supreme Court denied broker/dealer Alpine Securities’ attempt to immediately stop FINRA’s pursuit to expel it from the industry.

Last month, Alpine asked the Court to consider hearing its case against the regulator, arguing that a lower-court ruling did not go far enough.

But Chief Justice John Roberts opted to deny Alpine’s request for an immediate pause on that decision (and FINRA’s enforcement), according to the Supreme Court’s website.

The ruling, by a three-judge panel at the D.C. Appeals Court, partially agreed with Alpine, ruling that FINRA must let the SEC review its decisions to expel registrants. However, the court allowed FINRA’s enforcement proceedings against the firm to continue (with one judge dissenting and arguing that the Court should dismiss FINRA’s enforcement against Alpine altogether).

FINRA first charged Alpine with misconduct in 2019, and three years later, a hearing panel expelled the firm from the industry and ordered it to pay $2.3 million in restitution. FINRA later moved to expedite the expulsion, claiming Alpine was defying a cease-and-desist order.

Alpine moved to challenge FINRA’s constitutionality altogether, arguing its hearing officers and arbitration panels were essentially judges and trials overseeing U.S. securities law but operating without the oversight of the government’s executive branch. (Alpine’s arguments mirror claims made in several other cases throughout the country.)

Related:Stifel Plans Court Appeal After $133M FINRA Arbitration Award

In its petition to the Supreme Court, Alpine argued that its case was legally significant and that the firm would face immediate harm if FINRA’s enforcement was allowed to proceed. Alpine’s suit called into question FINRA’s enforcement arm, with the broker arguing that the self-regulatory organization had powers that violated the Constitution.

After Alpine submitted its motion to the Supreme Court, attorneys for the U.S. government wrote that Alpine’s arguments didn’t meet the level needed to grant a stay and that both the government and the public would be harmed if the Supreme Court opted to halt proceedings.

“There is a strong congressional and public interest in ensuring that securities markets remain trustworthy and sound, including by ensuring that those markets remain free of those who repeatedly violate not just the federal securities laws, but also longstanding industry rules that protect customers and investors,” the response read.

Benjamin Edwards, a professor at the William S. Boyd School of Law at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, noted that Roberts denied an immediate stay of the lower court ruling, but that didn’t mean Alpine’s cert petition (in other words, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case) will ultimately be denied.

Related:FINRA: Sanctuary Wealth’s B/D Fell Short on Money Laundering Oversight

“Of course, it will probably be denied because almost all cert petitions are denied,” he said (according to Pew research, the Supreme Court only hears about 80 cases a year out of 7,000 to 8,000 petitions).

FINRA declined a request to comment. Attorneys for Alpine Securities did not respond prior to publication.