Seventh Circuit Blocks CFTC’s Bid to Reopen Kraft Settlement, Keeps Records Sealed

COURT SLAPS CFTC IN KRAFT FIGHT OVER DOCUMENTS

The Seventh Circuit told the CFTC it cannot force a federal judge to hand over sealed materials from a long-settled Kraft case, narrowing the agency’s power to reopen closed enforcement files. The ruling matters because it limits how far the CFTC can reach when it wants to pressure companies—and signals that judges, not regulators, still control the paper trail.

Kraft and Mondelēz were accused in 2015 of manipulating wheat futures through massive physical purchases. The CFTC won a consent order that imposed a $16 million penalty and barred future violations. Years later the agency returned to the district court, claiming Kraft had breached the order and demanding internal documents to prove it. When the district judge refused to unseal or share those records, the CFTC petitioned the appeals court for a writ of mandamus—an extraordinary order that would have forced the lower court’s hand.

The three-judge panel rejected the petition outright. It held that mandamus is reserved for “clear and indisputable” legal rights and that the CFTC had shown none. The court stressed that the underlying case was already closed by consent decree, the documents were filed under seal by agreement, and the agency had other investigative tools, including subpoenas to the companies themselves. In short, the CFTC lost its shortcut.

Plainly, regulators cannot treat settled enforcement actions as open spigots of information. District judges retain discretion over sealed dockets, and companies that resolved old matters can now push back when the CFTC tries to reopen discovery through the courthouse rather than its own subpoena power.

The decision tilts authority away from the CFTC and toward the courts on access questions, tightening the practical limits on post-settlement fishing expeditions. In crypto markets already wary of enforcement creep, the precedent suggests exchanges and token teams may have stronger footing when agencies demand old records without fresh subpoenas. Traders should watch whether the CFTC responds by issuing broader administrative subpoenas instead—an escalation that could chill cooperation in future settlements.

Courts just reminded one regulator that closed cases stay closed unless they say otherwise; other agencies will feel the chill.