SEILA LAW LLC v. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU [Scotus Rules the POTUS Can Removed the Director For Any Reason]

Supreme Court of the United States ^ | June 29, 2020 | Staff

[C19fan]

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, Congress established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), an independent regulatory agency tasked with ensuring that consumer debt products are safe and transparent. See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank), 124 Stat. 1376. Congress transferred the administration of 18 existing federal statutes to the CFPB, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act; and Congress enacted a new prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices in the consumer-finance sector. 12 U. S. C. §5536(a)(1)(B). In doing so, Congress gave the CFPB extensive rulemaking, enforcement, and adjudicatory powers, including the authority to conduct investigations, issue subpoenas and civil investigative demands, initiate administrative adjudications, prosecute civil actions in federal court, and issue binding decisions in administrative proceedings. The CFPB may seek restitution, disgorgement, injunctive relief, and significant civil penalties for violations of the 19 federal statutes under its purview. So far, the agency has obtained over $11 billion in relief for more than 25 million consumers. Unlike traditional independent agencies headed by multimember boards or commissions, the CFPB is led by a single Director, §5491(b)(1), who is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, §5491(b)(2), for a five-year term, during which the President may remove the Director only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office,” §§5491(c)(1), (3). The CFPB receives its funding outside the annual appropriations process from the Federal Reserve, which is itself funded outside the appropriations process through bank assessments.

[C19fan]

When the CFPB was created the law limited the POTUS power to remove the Director only in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office,. The Scotus rules that is a violation of separation of power.

[Mouton]

Big deal, gave us a grounder.

[Thank You Rush]

The whole thing was set up at the instigation of Elizabeth Warren with the full approval of the president at the time..BIG MISTAKE then!

[zeugma]

As usual, Thomas’ concurrence is awesome. We need to clone this dude.