WASHINGTON – In a reaffirmation of a previous decision, a US appellate court this week ruled that the requirement for certain corporations to identify their products as not "conflict-free" is unconstitutional.

The decision, handed down Wednesday by the US Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, reaffirmed an April 2014 ruling that the requirement for companies to identify products as “not found to be ‘DRC conflict-free’” represented compelled commercial speech in violation of the First Amendment and could not be enforced by the SEC.

The rule is part of the Dodd-Frank bill, which mandated reporting by publicly traded companies, and charged the SEC with carrying out compliance.

In accordance with the SEC statement, reporting companies are not currently required to identify products in their conflict minerals reports as “DRC conflict-free,” “not found to be ‘DRC conflict-free’” or “DRC conflict undeterminable.”