In remarks at NYU Law School, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Director of Enforcement David I. Miller set out the Division’s enforcement priorities under Chairman Michael S. Selig, framing a shift away from “regulation by enforcement” toward policing fraud, abuse, and manipulation. The speech also asserted that insider trading prohibitions under the Commodity Exchange Act apply in prediction markets and previewed a forthcoming staff advisory that will replace the CFTC’s February 2025 cooperation policy. Miller identified five priority areas for enforcement: insider trading, including in prediction markets; market manipulation, with particular emphasis on energy markets; market abuse and disruptive trading such as spoofing, wash trading, and disruptive trading during closing periods; retail fraud, including Ponzi schemes and other impersonation and “phishing” attacks; and willful violations of anti-money laundering and know-your-customer rules. On prediction markets, he argued that insider trading can be prosecuted under CEA Section 6(c)(1) and CFTC Rule 180.1 where trading or tipping involves misappropriated material non-public information in breach of a duty, and highlighted potential cases involving misuse of government information, including under CEA Section 4c(a)(4) (the “Eddie Murphy Rule”). The remarks also pointed to exchanges’ core-principles obligations around surveillance and contract listing, and cited recent CFTC engagement such as an information-sharing memorandum of understanding with Major League Baseball. The Division expects to issue a new Staff Advisory on Cooperation in the near term and to update the Enforcement Manual, with the advisory and manual controlling over the speech. Key elements described include a more explicit declination pathway for eligible parties that promptly self-report, fully cooperate, and fully remediate absent aggravating circumstances; revised treatment of self-reporting that can remain eligible even if the CFTC already learned of the issue confidentially, but not where disclosure is public or imminent; and a “binary” approach to cooperation requiring full disclosure of relevant non-privileged information, preservation of records including ephemeral messages, and ongoing reporting, alongside remediation steps such as restitution and disgorgement.