CFPB needs more time to respond
Posted on 12/24/2015 at 06:53 AM by John Lande
This blog previously discussed the briefing timeline for the pending challenge to the constitutionality of the CFPB. After State National Bank of Big Spring (Bank) filed its motion arguing the CFPB is unconstitutional and rules promulgated while director Richard Cordray was a recess appointee are invalid.
The CFPB originally had until December 21, 2015, to file its response. However, on November 24, 2015, lawyers representing Congressman Sean Duffy (R-WI) sought leave from the court to file briefs arguing that the CFPB violates the provision in the Constitution that requires all federal money only be spent pursuant to a statutory appropriation. Congressman Duffy claims that he has a special interest in preserving the Constitution's separation of powers, particularly in cases, like this one, that implicate Congress's exclusive power of the purse. Congressman Duffy was joined in his request by Consumers' Research, an organization that state's its mission is to increase the knowledge and understanding of issues, policies, products, and services of concern to consumers and to promote the freedom to act on that knowledge and understanding. Consumers' Research takes issue with [t]he CFPB's reluctance to share with Congress and the public the basis for many of its regulatory and enforcement decisions has significantly undermined the ability of Consumers' Research to fulfill its mission as a consumer watchdog.
The CFPB has asked the court to extend the CFPB's deadline to respond to the brief from the Bank as well as Congressman Duffy and Consumers Research. The new briefing schedule will give the CFPB until January 8, 2016, to file its response. The Bank will have the opportunity to respond by February 22, 2016. The final brief from the CFPB will be filed on or before March 25, 2016.
The material in this blog is not intended, nor should it be construed or relied upon, as legal advice. Please consult with an attorney if specific legal information is needed.
Questions, Contact us today.
The material, whether written or oral (including videos) that is posted on the various blogs of Dickinson Law is not intended, nor should it be construed or relied upon, as legal advice. The opinions expressed in the various blog posting are those of the individual author, they may not reflect the opinions of the firm. Your use of the Dickinson Law blog postings does NOT create an attorney-client relationship between you and Dickinson, Mackaman, Tyler & Hagen, P.C. or any of its attorneys. If specific legal information is needed, please retain and consult with an attorney of your own selection.