Update: High Court Finds CFPB Funding Structure Constitutional Once and For All
ABSTRACT: Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 2022 Fifth Circuit Opinion holding the CFPB’s self-funding structure unconstitutional, providing clarity to courts and enforcement agencies across the nation about the CFPB’s authority for rulemaking and enforcement.
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 7-2 Opinion yesterday finding the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) constitutional. In so doing, the Supreme Court overturned the Fifth Circuit’s holding finding the opposite. The case was initiated and made its way through the appellate courts on behalf of Community Financial Services of America (“CSFA”), a group representing the interests of payday lenders.
The CFPB Payday Lending Rule that started this years-long legal battle is found at 12 S.F.R. § 1041.8 and prohibits what the CFPB described as the “unfair and abusive” practice by lenders of initiating subsequent payment transfers from consumer bank accounts after two consecutive failed attempts, in an effort to prevent excessive overdraft fees. Baker Sterchi previously discussed the Fifth Circuit’s holding and subsequent legal complications in prior posts.
The challenge to the CFPB’s funding structure centered on the powers granted to the CFPB under Dodd-Frank, which allows it to operate with funds from the Federal Reserve as opposed to funding approved by Congress.
The Supreme Court rejected CSFA’s argument that the funding structure violates the Appropriations Clause under the U.S. Constitution. Justice Thomas penned, "Under the Appropriations Clause, an appropriation is simply a law that authorizes expenditures from a specified source of public money for designated purposes. The statute that provides the bureau's funding meets these requirements. We therefore conclude that the bureau's funding mechanism does not violate the Appropriations Clause."
Justices Alito and Gorsuch dissented, with Alito warning that the majority opinion “upholds a novel statutory scheme under which the powerful Consumer Financial Protection Bureau may bankroll its own agenda without any congressional control or oversight."
The Supreme Court’s Opinion will impact numerous cases and enforcement actions that have been in limbo across the country as the Court’s decision was awaited. Much industry discussion has been centered around an assumption that the Fifth Circuit would be upheld and the question of how far the Supreme Court would reach in undermining previous CFPB enforcement actions. With the Supreme Court’s decision reversing the Fifth Circuit, those discussions are put to rest, at least until another constitutional challenge to the CFPB is raised.related services

Resolution Regarding Litigation Challenging CFPB Rule Capping Late Fees May Have Lasting Impact. ...

Litigation challenging CFPB Rule capping late fees likely to resolve soon. ...
About Financial Services Law Blog
Baker Sterchi's Financial Services Law Blog explores current events, litigation trends, regulations, and hot topics in the financial services industry. This blog informs readers of issues affecting a wide range of financial services, including mortgage lending, auto finance, and credit card/retail transactions. Learn more about the editor, Megan Stumph-Turner, and our Financial Services practice.
Subscribe via email
Subscribe to rss feeds
RSS FeedsABOUT baker sterchi blogs
Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice LLC (Baker Sterchi) publishes this website as a service to our clients, colleagues and others, for informational purposes only. These materials are not intended to create an attorney-client relationship, and are not a substitute for sound legal advice. You should not base any action or lack of action on any information included in our website, without first seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice. If you contact us through our website or via email, no attorney-client relationship is created, and no confidential information should be transmitted. Communication with Baker Sterchi by e-mail or other transmissions over the Internet may not be secure, and you should not send confidential electronic messages that are not adequately encrypted.
The hiring of an attorney is an important decision, which should not be based solely on information appearing on our website. To the extent our website has provided links to other Internet resources, those links are not under our control, and we are not responsible for their content. We do our best to provide you current, accurate information; however, we cannot guarantee that this information is the most current, correct or complete. In addition, you should not take this information as a promise or indication of future results.
Disclaimer
The Financial Services Law Blog is made available by Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice LLC for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. Your use of this blog site alone creates no attorney client relationship between you and the firm.
Confidential information
Do not include confidential information in comments or other feedback or messages related to the Financial Services Law Blog, as these are neither confidential nor secure methods of communicating with attorneys. The Financial Services Law Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.