wrote:
Instead, one links a securities case that Sam
WON in the U.S. Supreme Court ...

It's a little more complicated than that. Sloan won ONCE, on a
procedural matter; but there were several violations that lead to his
ban from the securities industry.

More on Sam Sloan's career as a broker:

http://www.ishipress.com/sec1991.htm

Beginning in May 1970, Sloan was the sole proprietor and manager of
Samuel H. Sloan & Co. ("Sloan & Co."), a broker-dealer registered with
the SEC pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. ??
78o(b). In [*2] 1971, the SEC filed a complaint against Sloan and Sloan
& Co. seeking injunctive and other relief for alleged violations of
Sections 15(b)1, 15(c)(3) and 17(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.
Sections 78o(b)(1), 78o(c)(3), and 78q(a), and Rules 17 C.F.R.
240.15b1-2, 15c3-1, 17a-3 and 17a-4 promulgated thereunder. On June 24,
1971, an order was entered on consent which preliminarily enjoined
Sloan and Sloan & Co. from further violations of the net capital and
bookkeeping requirements of the federal securities laws.

Thereafter, at trial, this Court found that Sloan & Co., under the
direction of Sloan, had violated provisions of the Exchange Act by
failing to properly maintain, keep current and preserve certain of its
books and records, and by effecting transactions in securities
otherwise than on a national securities exchange. The Court also found
that defendants, while engaged in unlawful acts, practices and courses
of business, had made use of the mails and means and instrumentalities
of interstate commerce, and effected the transactions otherwise than on
a national securities exchange. A number of the above mentioned
violations occurred after the Court's entry of the preliminary
injunction [*3] enjoining defendants from further violations. The Court
found that unless permanently enjoined, there was a likelihood that the
defendants would continue to engage in violations of the federal
securities laws. Accordingly, on January 14, 1974, a permanent
injunction was entered against defendants.

Sloan's appeal of the permanent injunction was dismissed because Sloan
was a fugitive when the appeal was scheduled to be heard. The Court of
Appeals in Sloan v. Sec, 535 F.2d 676, 677 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 429
U.S. 885 (1976), found that Sloan "apparently fled the jurisdiction to
escape sentencing for contempt of a preliminary injunction restraining
still further violations of SEC rules and requiring Sloan to permit SEC
examination of his books and records."

http://www.scripophily.net/canjavlimited.html

"This company [Canadian Javelin] was involved with distributing
misleading information, which ultimately led to a stock trading
suspension. This case was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide on
the SECs authority in halting trading. This was a landmark securities
case, which has been continually referenced in subsequent security
cases. On November 29, 1973, apparently because Canadian Javelin
Limited had disseminated allegedly false and misleading press releases
concerning certain of its business activities, the Commission issued
the first of what was to become a series of summary 10-day suspension
orders continuously suspending trading in CJL common stock from that
date until January 26, 1975. App. 109. During this series of
suspensions respondent Sloan, who owned 13 shares of CJL stock and had
engaged in substantial purchases and short sales of shares of that
stock, filed a petition in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit challenging the orders on a variety of grounds."