<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>CLP Blog</provider_name><provider_url>https://clpblog.citizen.org</provider_url><author_name>Brian Wolfman</author_name><title>Supreme Court says class actions under Securities Act of 1933 are for state courts - CLP Blog</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="0XYXMq5S5d"&gt;&lt;a href="https://clpblog.citizen.org/supreme-court-says-class-actions-under-securities-act-of-1933-are-for-state-courts/"&gt;Supreme Court says class actions under Securities Act of 1933 are for state courts&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://clpblog.citizen.org/supreme-court-says-class-actions-under-securities-act-of-1933-are-for-state-courts/embed/#?secret=0XYXMq5S5d" width="600" height="338" title="&#x201C;Supreme Court says class actions under Securities Act of 1933 are for state courts&#x201D; &#x2014; CLP Blog" data-secret="0XYXMq5S5d" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;script type="text/javascript"&gt;
/* &lt;![CDATA[ */
/*! This file is auto-generated */
!function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&amp;&amp;d.addEventListener&amp;&amp;"undefined"!=typeof URL&amp;&amp;(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&amp;&amp;!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i&lt;o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i&lt;a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&amp;&amp;(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3&lt;(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r&lt;200&amp;&amp;(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&amp;&amp;(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&amp;&amp;n.host===r.host&amp;&amp;l.activeElement===s&amp;&amp;(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r&lt;s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document);
/* ]]&gt; */
&lt;/script&gt;
</html><description>The result today in&#xA0;Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund&#xA0;is interesting, particularly given the legislative trend to provide forum choice to defendants in aggregate litigation (which usually means federal court, because big companies generally prefer federal court). The issues and the Supreme Court's unanimous holding are crisply stated in the first paragraph of Justice Kagan's [...]</description></oembed>
