The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) bolstered its own whistleblower rules and procedures as part of the Dodd-Frank Act, with final regulations having been approved in May, 2011. Under these new rules, people who witness violations of securities law were able to directly to the SEC with information, whereas before they were required to address the matter internally before going to the regulators (however the SEC still strongly encourages going through internal channels first). 

The Supreme Court case involved a man named  Paul Somers, who worked for a company Digital Realty Trust, which fired him after he reported alleged securities law violations to his senior management, though not to the SEC. He was fired soon after making this report. Somers argued that he should have been protected under the anti-retaliation measures implemented as part of the Dodd-Frank Act. 

The court, however, came to unanimous agreement that the protections did not apply to him because he did not inform the SEC of the fraud. Justice Ginsberg said that the provisions are there to prevent interference with SEC enforcement actions. The law, she said, is clear: a whistleblower receives SEC protection only when an  individual provides information relating to a violation of the securities laws to the SEC. Since this did not happen, Somers does not count as an SEC whistleblower.