WSJ Editorial Board echoes CUNA argument on CFPB constitutionality to SCOTUS

March 3, 2020

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board echoed CUNA’s thoughts on the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in a piece published as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear a case questioning the constitutionality of having a single director removable only for cause leading the CFPB. The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Seila Law v. CFPB Tuesday, with a decision expected in early Summer.

The Dodd-Frank Act contains a provision stating that the CFPB director can only be fired for “inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.”

In the piece, the board argues that, rather than letting the CPFB exist as it currently does, or tossing out all of Dodd-Frank, “our suggestion is that the Court strike down the law but delay the ruling’s implementation for a year or so to give Congress and the President time to amend the law if they see fit.”

CUNA has argued for years that the single director structure undermines the stability needed at the CFPB, as its actions have major effects on the financial system, financial institutions and consumers.

CUNA filed a brief with the Supreme Court in Seila Law v. CFPB in December 2019, arguing that the creation of a multi-member leadership commission at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) would remedy the constitutional defect currently present at the agency.