"The DOL argues not only that the Supreme Court needs to hear this case, but that it should reframe the questions, rule that an ESOP is an investment that is subject to divestment and prudence review in the same manner as other investments, rule that the presumption does not exist at the initial state, and rule that the presumption of prudence does not exist, at all.... A U.S. Supreme Court ruling that the presumption of prudence does not apply at the initial stage, or a ruling that the presumption does not apply at all, would seemingly eviscerate the statutory boundaries that favor ESOPs, and likely have a significant chilling effect. Employers would have to consider whether the ESOP model remains viable and is worth the risk. For publicly traded companies, such a decision could cause a precipitous sell-off of employer stock that drives down the stock price."  MORE >>