Amicus briefs in CFPB v. Seila Law LLC argue there is Supreme Court precedent to rule the CFPB’s leadership structure is unconstitutional; countering a circuit court decision this spring.
8/8/2019 14:00
Several parties are supporting review of the Ninth Circuit Court’s May ruling that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s leadership structure, a single director removable for cause, is constitutional, according to a report from Alan Kaplinsky, partner with Ballard Spahr LLP.
The Ninth Circuit panel this spring unanimously ruled the “CFPB’s single-director-removable-only-for-cause structure is constitutional” in CFPB v. Seila Law LLC.
Seila Law LLC then filed a writ of certiorari petition seeking review of the ruling, now supported in seven amicus briefs from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; attorneys general in Texas, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia; Separation of Powers Scholars; Pacific Legal Foundation; Landmark Legal Foundation; Cato Institute; Southeastern Legal Foundation and National Federation of Independent Small Business Legal Center.
“All of the briefs argue that the CFPB’s structure is unconstitutional under relevant Supreme Court precedent but do not take a position on what the appropriate remedy should be (i.e. striking all of Title X of Dodd-Frank or only severing the for-cause removal provision,)” Kaplinsky writes.
The parties also state there is the “need to eliminate uncertainty regarding the constitutionality of the bureau’s actions, particularly its regulations,” that can be accomplished through the Supreme Court granting Seila Law’s petition, according to the report.
Related Content from ACA International:
Court Panel Rules CFPB Leadership Structure is Constitutional
Circuit Court Sets Oral Argument in Case Involving Challenge to CFPB Constitutionality
U.S. Department of Justice Opposes Petition for Supreme Court to Hear BCFP Case
U.S. Supreme Court Denies Hearing for CFPB Constitutionality Case