摘要：Introduction The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1 declares that securities prices are susceptible to manipulation 2 and that manipulation precipitates, intensifies and prolongs national emergencies like the depression that followed the stock market crash of 1929. 3 The Exchange Act addresses the problem by forbidding a variety of trading practices that it labels manipulative 4 and subjecting others to regulation. 5 It also gives the Securities and Exchange Commission plenary authority to regulate the use of any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in connection with securities transactions. 6 These laws were designed to prevent securities manipulation. 7 Daniel R. Fischel and David J. Ross recently offered a provocative reexamination of the subject of manipulation. 8 Although Fischel and Ross begin their article with the observation that much of the regulation of financial markets seeks to prevent manipulation, 9 their purpose is not to show how the law might achieve this goal. On the contrary, their position is that manipulation is not really a problem at all. After offering what they call the first principled analysis of the concept of manipulation, 10 Fischel and Ross argue that the law's efforts to prevent manipulation are misguided. They conclude that the concept of manipulation should be abandoned altogether. ... Actual trades should not be prohibited as manipulative regardless of the intent of the trader. 11 As Fischel and Ross see it, there is no reason to prohibit manipulative trading because there is nothing to prohibit. They ...
