(Reuters) — A federal judge on Wednesday refused to stop the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission from pursuing a case against a former Standard & Poor's Corp. executive over her role in an alleged fraud involving ratings for commercial mortgage-backed securities.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan said Barbara Duka did not deserve a preliminary injunction because she was unlikely to succeed on the merits of her argument that SEC administrative proceedings are unconstitutional.

But the judge also departed from earlier decisions by other judges in finding he had jurisdiction to review the claim, which he called "outside the SEC's expertise."

Guy Petrillo, a lawyer for Ms. Duka, said he is reviewing the decision. SEC spokesman Kevin Callahan declined to comment.

The SEC is pursuing more enforcement cases in-house, rather than in federal court where defendants may have more procedural protections, using authority it gained through the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act financial reforms.

Others who have objected to SEC administrative proceedings include U.S. financier Lynn Tilton, who sued the regulator on April 1; former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. director Rajat Gupta; and Wing Chau, an investor featured in Michael Lewis' best-seller "The Big Short."

Ms. Duka, a former head of S&P's CMBS group, was charged with having in 2011 concealed how S&P had eased its criteria for calculating some commercial mortgage ratings.

S&P, a unit of McGraw Hill Financial Inc., agreed in January to pay $77 million to settle related charges by the SEC and the New York and Massachusetts attorneys general.

Ms. Duka said the SEC case against her belongs in federal court, and like some other defendants argued that administrative proceedings violate Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

She said this was because administrative law judges qualify as executive branch officers subject to removal only for "good cause," yet enjoy layered job protections that can make it impossible for the president to remove them.

Judge Berman, though, said the U.S. Supreme Court had upheld restrictions on the president to remove "quasi-judicial" officials, like commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission and members of a panel reviewing World War II injury claims.

"This court finds no basis for concluding, as Duka urges, that the statutory restrictions upon the removal of SEC ALJs are so structured as to infringe the president's constitutional authority," Judge Berman wrote.

The case is Duka v. SEC, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 15-00357.