The State itself can sue the banks for those misleading statements, e.g.: https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-fc.shtml

Yes. The point is that corporations' new 'free speech rights' may interfere with that.

The other guy already addressed this. It doesn't matter whether it's the state suing. Free speech doesn't mean you can't sue for misleading statements.

What new rights are you referring to, Citizen's United?

I think that was the case; I wasn't sure enough to name it though.

>Also, the problem is not just misleading statements, but requiring that essential information is included, that it's expressed according to certain common standards, and that it's understandable to common people - not just to Wall Street bankers.

Whether it's understandable doesn't matter, you only need to prove that they intentionally mislead you to get you to sign something detrimental to your interests.

>There's a long history of selling bad deals to widows and orphans by confusing them. Currently you can't sell certain things to non-professionals; if they have free speech, can you stop them?

I'm sure there already are laws that prevent/penalize sellers from conning people.

> Whether it's understandable doesn't matter

There is a wide chasm between provably misleading and confusion or lack of information on the readers' side. That's why those communications are regulated, afaik.

> I'm sure there already are laws that prevent/penalize sellers from conning people.

Right, laws and regulations.

1) My point above was that the legal analysts said that the new corporate free speech rights, which the Supreme Court said were Constitutional rights (if I understand correctly), might invalidate those laws.

2) If you look at the recent history of Wall Street fraud, which among other things was the cause of the 2008 Great Recession, those laws and regulations haven't been effective enough.

>1) My point above was that the legal analysts said that the new corporate free speech rights, which the Supreme Court said were Constitutional rights (if I understand correctly), might invalidate those laws.

But then why aren't individuals using this as a defense already?, they have had the free speech rights for much longer.

> why aren't individuals using this as a defense already?, they have had the free speech rights for much longer.

I don't think individuals are regulated by the SEC, for example. Usually it's corporations that are. What are you thinking of?

Basically, if a corporation can say/do things, and then claim it's just their expression and so protected under the First Amendment, shouldn't individuals be able to do the same?

In general, not necessarily in finance; but surely there are fields where certified professionals are liable when something goes wrong based on their advice or decisions (say, accounting or civil engineering).

>who can afford to sue a Wall Street bank

Probably investors or rich customers who get screwed by these statements or a band of normal folks in a class action lawsuit