The Supreme Court of the United States announced on Monday that it had agreed to hear arguments in a case dealing with the constitutionality—or unconstitutionality—of an entire federal agency: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Specifically, the case deals with how the CFPB is funded.
Currently, the Federal Reserve keeps the CFPB’s lights on, rather than Congress which has responsibility of funding the rest of federal bureaucracy.
The decision for SCOTUS to take the case comes after a lower court—the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit—ruled that the CFPB’s funding system is unconstitutional in a unanimous decision.
Instead, the panel said that the CFPB should be funded by Congress.
NOTE: The CFPB states its mission is to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices and take action against companies that break the law. Further explanation:
Complaints can give us insights into problems people are experiencing in the marketplace and help us regulate consumer financial products and services under existing federal consumer financial laws, enforce those laws judiciously, and educate and empower consumers to make informed financial decisions.
Is this not government overreach?
The appeals court’s ruling noted:
The Bureau’s funding scheme is unique across the myriad independent executive agencies across the federal government.
It is not funded with periodic congressional appropriations [as the rest are].
In the wake of the lower court ruling, the Obiden Regime sought to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court in the current term. And, while SCOTUS did agree to hear arguments in the case, it delayed the case until its next term which won’t get underway until October, likely pushing a decision on the case to June 2024.
Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) responded to the Supreme Court’s order taking up the case by noting:
[T]he CFPB has long been an agency that lacks transparency and seeks to operate beyond its jurisdiction.
I look forward to reviewing the Supreme Court’s decision, when the time comes, and continuing my efforts to hold the CFPB accountable to the American people and Congress.
Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) added his voice, saying the Supreme Court ought to “strike down” the agency’s “unlawful” funding system.
The CFPB is a rogue, unconstitutional agency that only protects left-wing bureaucrats and trial lawyers.
The Supreme Court should strike down the CFPB's unlawful funding scheme.
— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) February 27, 2023
In addition, Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN) said that for:
[F]ar too long, the CFPB has operated outside of the appropriations process and as such, has been operating in an entirely unaccountable manner.
He said this explains:
Precisely why I introduced the CFPB Accountability Act last Congress to fix this glaring separation-of-powers issue.
The CFPB was created by a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act which was passed in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008, and designed to have its funding system circumvent Congress in an attempt to make it less susceptible to the changing political winds that carry parties in and out of power in the House and Senate.
[CFPB] has been referred to as the “baby” of Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who came up with the idea for the CFPB while she was still a professor and hadn’t yet been elected to the U.S. Senate.
Warren, predictably, is not pleased that the appeals court ruled her “baby” is constructed in an unconstitutional manner, and released a statement and tweet lamenting:
[Y]ears of desperate attacks from Republicans and corporate lobbyists.
Warren’s statement continued by noting:
[T]he constitutionality of the CFPB and its funding structure have been upheld time and time again.
Despite years of desperate attacks from Republicans & corporate lobbyists, the constitutionality of @CFPB & its funding structure have been upheld.
If the Supreme Court follows precedent, it will strike down the Fifth Circuit’s decision before it throws our economy into chaos.
— Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) February 27, 2023
But Liz, “upheld time and time again” merely puts this in the same category as Roe v. Wade, i.e., an unconstitutional decision made and wrongfully propagated for fifty years. If common sense prevails, the CFPB will not live nearly as long.
As Matt Vespa reported in 2019:
[T]he Supreme Court scrutinized the constitutionality of the CFPB—specifically its executive structure—and found its setup with a sole director that could only be terminated for cause to be unconstitutional for violating the separation of powers.
Warren, apparently, forgot about that case because it didn’t completely gut the agency.
Despite another facet of the CFPB not passing constitutional muster and the Supreme Court being a different body than it was when it last ruled, Warren remains optimistic, at least publicly.
Warren stated:
If the Supreme Court follows more than a century of law and historical precedent, it will strike down the Fifth Circuit’s decision before it throws our financial markets and economy into chaos.
Final thought: The CFPB is one more element of the Leftist, big government power grab that must come down as part of the return of our Constitutional Republic roots.
God speed to Conservatism.
