Why Wasn't Phil Mickelson Charged With Insider Trading?

The video discusses a case involving Phil Mickelson, who was named as a relief defendant by the SEC, indicating he received ill-gotten gains without being charged with wrongdoing. The case highlights the complexities of modern insider trading, where information is passed through various channels, making it difficult to prosecute. The video explores the legal and ethical challenges of insider trading, the role of hedge funds, and the need for clearer laws. It concludes with a discussion on potential legal changes and the impact on market confidence.

What does it mean for someone to be named as a relief defendant in a case?

How has the nature of insider trading changed compared to 20 years ago?

What challenges do regulators face in proving insider trading today?

In what ways do the public's perceptions of the stock market affect confidence in it?

What role does Congress play in clarifying insider trading laws?