Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 12:16 PM Jan 2018

Appeals court rules consumer bureau's structure is constitutional

Source: The Hill

Language in the Dodd-Frank Act that establishes the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s independence from Congress is constitutional, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit ruled Wednesday, overturning a 2016 ruling by three of the court's judges.

In a review of the court’s previous decision in PHH vs. CFPB, the full panel held that the CFPB can exist as an independent agency with a sole director only fireable by the president for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance” without violating the Constitution's limits on executive power.

Judge Nina Pillard, who wrote the court’s opinion, cited the precedent set by Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, a 1935 case reaffirming the legality of the Federal Trade Commission’s independent, sole-director structure.

We follow that precedent here to hold that the parallel provision of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act shielding the Director of the CFPB from removal without cause is consistent with Article II.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/371603-dc-circuit-consumer-bureaus-structure-is-constiutional?rnd=1517414045/?userid=216387




18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

FreepFryer

(7,077 posts)
3. The last line of the piece suggests otherwise... did you read it?
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 12:21 PM
Jan 2018

"Wednesday's ruling gives Mulvaney a clear path to continue reshaping the CFPB."

FreepFryer

(7,077 posts)
9. Not trying to be rude but I have no idea what you are talking about...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 12:45 PM
Jan 2018

The ruling upholds that Mulvaney can only be removed for cause.

The piece ends with the line I pasted above, that Mulvaney is free to keep being a major POS.

How does anything other than your post imply 'bye-bye Mulvaney'?

FreepFryer

(7,077 posts)
14. What does 'removing to "plant" Mulvaney' mean? It's not English. Your post's link is very clear.
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 05:11 PM
Jan 2018

From YOUR OP's link:

Mulvaney has taken several steps to rein in the CFPB’s regulations and its oversight of the financial sector, drawing criticism from liberals who say he is effectively shutting down the agency.

Wednesday's ruling gives Mulvaney a clear path to continue reshaping the CFPB, as he will retain his power as acting director. Cordray said the ruling is important to the future of the bureau, even if it gives Mulvaney cover to unwind his legacy.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
4. It's truly remarkable how the R's cling to the notion that doing the right thing...
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 12:23 PM
Jan 2018

is a 'whimsical prerogative' of the elected representatives of the Democratic Party.

We know the R's function this way to advance their hateful, nasty, deplorable agendas, but that "Arc Keeps Bending" regardless!

elleng

(130,865 posts)
17. Yes indeed, and likely is pleased by this decision,
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 08:50 PM
Jan 2018

tho doesn't strike me as one who pats herself on the back.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
15. Thank you, Liz Warren, for creating this protection for the 99%!!
Wed Jan 31, 2018, 06:46 PM
Jan 2018

Amazing what a competent, knowledgeable, and collaborative Senator can accomplish in a few short years in public service!

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Appeals court rules consu...