The U.S. Supreme Court case Kokesh v. SEC in 2016 revolved around the issue of whether the five-year statute of limitations, as stated under 28 U.S.C §2462, applies to claims for "disgorgement" imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Disgorgement is a remedy used by the SEC to recover ill-gotten gains from those who violate securities laws. Charles R. Kokesh was ordered by a district court to pay $34.9 million in disgorgement for violating various securities laws over several years beyond this five-year limit. Kokesh appealed against this decision arguing that disgorgements were penalties and thus subject to a five-year statute of limitations under federal law. The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with him, ruling that because such sanctions go beyond mere compensation and are intended to punish offenders and deter others from offending, they do indeed constitute penalties within the meaning of §2462. This landmark judgment significantly limited how far back into an offender's past violations regulators can reach when seeking financial punishments or remedies like disgorgements.

In the dissenting opinion for Kokesh v. SEC, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that the majority's decision to classify disgorgement as a penalty was incorrect and could potentially undermine future enforcement of securities laws. She contended that disgorgement is not punitive but rather remedial because it merely deprives wrongdoers of their ill-gotten gains and returns them to those who were harmed. According to her, this does not fit into the traditional definition of a penalty which aims at punishing an offense against public justice rather than compensating victims. Furthermore, she expressed concern about how this ruling might affect other areas where courts have ordered disgorgements such as antitrust or consumer protection cases.