States argue leadership structure encroaches on their enforcement abilities.
11/15/2019 8:30
Several state attorneys general have filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that the leadership structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional.
According to an article in Reverse Mortgage Daily, 11 state attorneys general joined a complaint challenging the structure, the brief states, “due to their contention that the enforcement authority and director structure of the bureau encroaches on the states’ own abilities to enforce its own consumer protection laws.”
The attorneys general include Texas, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to review Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a case that challenges the constitutionality of the CFPB’s leadership structure, ACA International previously reported.
In Seila Law, a Ninth Circuit panel unanimously ruled the CFPB’s single director structure was constitutional but that Seila Law’s arguments to the contrary are “not without force.”
The Supreme Court’s review of the structure the CFPB is monumental. And, this marks the first time since the CFPB’s inception that agency leadership and the U.S. Department of Justice will not defend the structure of the bureau in litigation.