Thrifty Banker
  • Politics
  • Business
  • World
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • Business
  • World
  • Investing

Thrifty Banker

Politics

Supreme Court rules in favor of CFPB, brainchild of Sen. Elizabeth Warren

by May 17, 2024
May 17, 2024
Supreme Court rules in favor of CFPB, brainchild of Sen. Elizabeth Warren

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the funding mechanism that feeds the Obama-era agency Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is constitutional.

In a 7-2 decision, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court held that Congress uniquely authorized the bureau to draw its funding directly from the Federal Reserve System, therefore allowing it to bypass the usual funding mechanisms laid out in the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution. 

‘For most federal agencies, Congress provides funding on an annual basis. This annual process forces them to regularly implore Congress to fund their operations for the next year. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is different. The Bureau does not have to petition for funds each year. Instead, Congress authorized the Bureau to draw from the Federal Reserve System the amount its Director deems ‘reasonably necessary to carry out’ the Bureau’s duties, subject only to an inflation-adjusted cap,’ Thomas wrote. 

‘In this case, we must decide the narrow question whether this funding mechanism complies with the Appropriations Clause. We hold that it does,’ the opinion states. 

The CFPB launched in 2008 with the help of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in the aftermath of the market crash, with authority to regulate banking and lending agencies via federal rules.

A group of banking associations, represented by former solicitor general Noel Francisco, sued the CFPB, arguing that because the agency, not Congress, decides the amount of annual funding and draws it from the Federal Reserve, it violates the Appropriations Clause. 

The Supreme Court’s majority disagreed, saying, ‘Although there may be other constitutional checks on Congress’ authority to create and fund an administrative agency, specifying the source and purpose is all the control the Appropriations Clause requires.’

‘The statute that authorizes the Bureau to draw money from the combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System to carry out its duties satisfies the Appropriations Clause,’ the opinion states. 

Justice Samuel Alito dissented from the decision, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, saying, ‘The Court upholds a novel statutory scheme under which the powerful [CFPB] may bankroll its own agenda without any congressional control or oversight.’

‘According to the Court, all that the Appropriations Clause demands is that Congress ‘identify a source of public funds and authorize the expenditure of those funds for designated purposes,’’ Alito wrote. 

‘Under this interpretation, the Clause imposes no temporal limit that would prevent Congress from authorizing the Executive to spend public funds in perpetuity,’ he stated. 

‘In short, there is apparently nothing wrong with a law that empowers the Executive to draw as much money as it wants from any identified source for any permissible purpose until the end of time.’ 

‘That is not what the Appropriations Clause was understood to mean when it was adopted. In England, Parliament had won the power over the purse only after centuries of struggle with the Crown. Steeped in English constitutional history, the Framers placed the Appropriations Clause in the Constitution to protect this hard-won legislative power,’ he said. 

Alito continued, ‘There are times when it is our duty to say simply that a law that blatantly attempts to circumvent the Constitution goes too far. This is such a case.’ 

‘Today’s decision is not faithful to the original understanding of the Appropriations Clause and the centuries of history that gave birth to the appropriations requirement, and I therefore respectfully dissent,’ he concluded. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Johnson rebukes Biden, Schumer over blocked Israel aid as House votes to force bomb deliveries
next post
Garland rips ‘unfounded’ effort to hold him in contempt after Biden asserts executive privilege over Hur audio

Related Posts

Three ways Biden challenger Dean Phillips is sending...

November 1, 2023

First on Fox: Republican National Committee January fundraising...

January 31, 2024

Biden cuts beach trip short amid potential Iranian...

April 14, 2024

Republicans blast Biden State of the Union as...

March 8, 2024

Gallagher rolls out ‘DADDY Act’ to block family...

September 30, 2023

Alabama AG calls for investigation into Biden’s reversal...

August 22, 2023

House Democrat slams Bernie Sanders’ call for barriers...

November 21, 2023

Congress demands more information on Defense Secretary Austin’s...

January 9, 2024

US removes mention of Iran from draft UN...

October 25, 2023

State Dept stresses no conclusion on Israel’s possible...

May 14, 2024

    Sign up for our newsletter to receive the latest insights, updates, and exclusive content straight to your inbox! Whether it's industry news, expert advice, or inspiring stories, we bring you valuable information that you won't find anywhere else. Stay connected with us!


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Popular

    • 1

      Top 10 Countries for Natural Gas Production (Updated 2024)

      April 6, 2024
    • 2

      Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be revived under new House GOP bill

      June 27, 2024
    • 3

      Top 10 Uranium-producing Countries (Updated 2024)

      April 18, 2024
    • 4

      A GOP operative accused a monastery of voter fraud. Nuns fought back.

      January 3, 2025
    • 5

      Top 9 Nickel-producing Countries (Updated 2024)

      April 23, 2024
    • 6

      Australian abolitionist, Grace Forrest, receives coveted ‘Freedom from Fear’ award

      April 13, 2024
    • 7

      LME Sanctions on Russian Metal Push Copper, Nickel and Aluminum Prices Higher

      April 17, 2024

    Categories

    • Business (1,032)
    • Investing (2,050)
    • Politics (2,977)
    • Uncategorized (20)
    • World (3,351)
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: thriftybanker.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 thriftybanker.com | All Rights Reserved