Liz Warren’s baby, the mutant government beast known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is going to court. The High Court. And in preparation for the claim that its structure is unconstitutional, it has agreed that this is true.
Related: Who Makes More Than ‘Bankers?’ Bank Regulators, Of Course!
It is not a typical response.
Like all evil, the priority is to survive and expand. Government agencies exist to become bigger. Budget broadening mission creep is the goal. The CFPB is taking a different approach.
In May, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected Seila’s arguments. Seila responded with a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court, and prompted an unusual response.
Today, the Department of Justice filed its response on behalf of the CFPB, and it was not the typical brief in opposition. Rather than argue against granting the petition, DOJ endorsed Seila’s call for certiorari, and noted that the CFPB itself now accepts the argument (which DOJ had previously endorsed) that the CFPB, as structured, is unconstitutional.
In June 2018, we reported on competing decisions on the subject. A New York Court claimed it was unconstitutional while a DC Circuit affirmed things were above board. Now we have a case in which the plaintiffs and the government agree. So, it seems likely that the Supreme Court will make room to clear the air.
What happens should the court agree with all parties is unclear. While dissolving the enterprise entirely would be the best outcome, the question is not whether the government has the right to regulate through CFPB it is the structure of the agency.
The CFPB has a single director who is unelected and does not answer to the President. There is no executive oversight. Talk about a swamp creature. A beast the left would love to duplicate. Progressive busybodies run amuck.
But the Court seems poised to prevent this from continuing which would make it clear that duplicating the scheme would not pass muster.
Let’s hope.
