Supreme Court: CFPB funding doesn't violate Constitution
Legal Compliance News
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a conservative-led attack that could have undermined the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The justices ruled 7-2 that the way the CFPB is funded does not violate the Constitution, reversing a lower court and drawing praises from consumers. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion, splitting with his frequent allies, Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, who dissented.
The CFPB was created after the 2008 financial crisis to regulate mortgages, car loans and other consumer finance. The case was brought by payday lenders who object to a bureau rule that limits their ability to withdraw funds directly from borrowers’ bank accounts. It’s among several major challenges to federal regulatory agencies on the docket this term for a court that has for more than a decade been open to limits on their operations.
The CFPB, the brainchild of Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, has long been opposed by Republicans and their financial backers. The bureau says it has returned $19 billion to consumers since its creation.
Outside the Supreme Court following the decision, Warren said, “The Supreme Court followed the law, and the CFPB is here to stay.”
President Joe Biden, a fellow Democrat who has taken steps to strengthen the bureau, called the ruling “an unmistakable win for American consumers.”
Unlike most federal agencies, the consumer bureau does not rely on the annual budget process in Congress. Instead, it is funded directly by the Federal Reserve, with a current annual limit of around $600 million.
The federal appeals court in New Orleans, in a novel ruling, held that the funding violated the Constitution’s appropriations clause because it improperly shields the CFPB from congressional supervision.
Related listings
-
Mexico breaks diplomatic ties with Ecuador after embassy raid
Legal Compliance News 04/08/2024The Mexican president has quickly moved to break off diplomatic ties with Ecuador after police broke into the Mexican Embassy to arrest a former vice president who had sought political asylum there after being indicted on corruption charges.In an ext...
-
Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 years in prison for Sam Bankman-Fried
Legal Compliance News 03/15/2024FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s orchestration of one of history’s largest financial frauds in his quest to dominate the cryptocurrency world deserves a prison sentence of 40 to 50 years, federal prosecutors on Friday told a federal judge....
-
Sydney court postpones extradition hearing of former US military pilot
Legal Compliance News 10/24/2023A Sydney court on Monday postponed an extradition hearing for a former U.S. military pilot accused of illegally training Chinese aviators until May as his lawyers attempt to further build their case.Boston-born Dan Duggan, 55, was scheduled to fight ...
CHICAGO BUSINESS & CORPORATE LITIGATION LAWYERS
When faced with a legal challenge, your attorneys should help you identify your goals at the beginning of the process. Thereafter, every action that follows must be undertaken with the aim of meeting those goals. Wasted effort equals wasted time and money, that’s something you cannot afford and your attorneys must respect this concept. At Roth Law Group, we counsel our clients to confront their legal challenges aggressively, but with purpose.
As a former Marine Corps Pilot, I learned that you must assess the situation, determine your mission, construct a plan to achieve the mission and execute that plan. As an attorney and small business owner, I apply the same concepts in taking on my client’s legal challenges. And while it is generally preferable to resolve cases early in the process whenever possible, if you have no choice but to fight, you need someone who is willing to aggressively advocate for you. Here at Roth Law Group, we never back down from a challenge and we fight to win. Let our experienced attorneys put you in control of your legal challenges so you can get back to running your business.