CUNA joined other trade organizations Friday in filing an amicus brief in a court case that questions the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) structure. The case, PHH v. CFPB, gained attention last year due to an October ruling from the D.C. Court of Appeals calling into question the CFPB’s constitutionality.
It also struck language from the Dodd-Frank Act saying the CFPB director can only be removed with cause.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the CFPB’s petition for an “en banc” re-hearing of the case, meaning it will be heard before all judges of the court.
CUNA’s joint trades amicus brief focuses on the non-constitutional issues in the case. It applauds the court for the previous decision it rendered on the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), statute of limitations and retroactivity issues and discusses the need for regulatory certainty and due process, noting that RESPA is one of the most important statutes that govern the mortgage industry.
For more information on the joint brief, see CUNA's Removing Barriers Blog.
In addition to closely following PHH v. CFPB, CUNA is a strong supporter of changing the CFPB’s leadership structure to a 5-person commission. The change is one of the primary goals of CUNA’s bipartisan, pro-consumer Campaign for Common-Sense Regulation.