Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194 (1947), is a United States Supreme Court case.

The first time this was heard before the Supreme Court in SEC v. Chenery Corporation, 318 U.S. 80 (1943), the Court held that the acts committed by the company did not amount to common law fraud and, therefore, the Securities and Exchange Commission's stated rationale for the charges could not be sustained.

The court used the case as an opportunity to discuss the merits of policy-making through adjudication and retroactive rule-making.

The US Supreme Court stated that policy-making through administrative adjudication is not necessarily wrong and may be desirable.

Justice Jackson dissented because he felt that the basis for Chenery I was that the SEC must do rule-making before it applies this principle of law.

The dissent is also notable for Jackson's reaction to the extraordinarily long and cumbersome majority opinion: "I give up.