The Federal Trade Commission sued Scott Tucker and his payday-lending companies for deceptive practices and obtained a permanent injunction plus $1.27 billion in restitution and disgorgement under §13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The Supreme Court considered whether the phrase “permanent injunction” authorized the Commission to obtain equitable monetary relief directly in federal court without first using the Act’s administrative procedures. The Court held unanimously that it did not. Section 13(b) addresses prospective injunctive relief, while the Act’s separate provisions expressly authorize limited monetary remedies after specified administrative steps and conditions. Reading §13(b) to allow unrestricted monetary awards would make those safeguards largely meaningless. The Court rejected the Commission’s reliance on general equitable principles and later congressional amendments, explaining that the scope of relief depends on the statutory scheme as a whole. It reversed the Ninth Circuit and remanded.