Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Justice Gorsuch on the Spending Power
Wall Street Journal ^ | Oct. 3, 2023 | The Editorial Board

Posted on 10/04/2023 5:46:10 PM PDT by george76

Is there any ceiling, or floor, to what the CFPB can decide to spend?..

The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments in a challenge to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s novel self-funding scheme (CFPB v. Community Financial Services Assn.) A telling moment came when Justice Neil Gorsuch pressed the Solicitor General on the limits to the agency’s appropriations power.

Democrats insulated the CFPB from political accountability in the Dodd-Frank Act by letting it obtain its funding from the Federal Reserve, unlike any other federal agency. Payday lenders say this violates the Constitution’s command that “no Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”

The CFPB’s legal brief argued the scheme was constitutional in part because the law sets a limit of $734 million, adjusted annually for inflation, on the amount that the Fed can transfer to the bureau. But the Solicitor General on Tuesday contended that the CFPB’s self-funding arrangement would be constitutional even if there were no cap.

...

Under the Administration’s theory, there’s no limiting principle to executive power.

...

Congress abdicated its spending power by delegating it to the CFPB. Surely this wasn’t what the Framers intended by writing checks and balances into the Constitution.

(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cfpb; congress; doddfrank

1 posted on 10/04/2023 5:46:10 PM PDT by george76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: george76
Democrats insulated the CFPB from political accountability in the Dodd-Frank Act by letting it obtain its funding from the Federal Reserve

I didn't know this. A bureaucracy that bypasses Congress for its own funding? Yeah, totally unconstitutional.

2 posted on 10/04/2023 5:57:28 PM PDT by Right_Wing_Madman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

With a Pure Fiat currency and the power to print at will any funds necessary, what exactly are these limits they are talking about?


3 posted on 10/04/2023 6:50:29 PM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right_Wing_Madman

Not if 5 people say it is ok


4 posted on 10/04/2023 11:34:08 PM PDT by genghis (Cathinkngact only re check ason go after e puthatn 5nu0 inbbiedComlpln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: george76

Cap or no cap, this is a veritable and unaccountable slush fund. Wow... gotta wonder if the Democrats haven’t already weaponized it.


5 posted on 10/05/2023 10:39:06 AM PDT by alancarp (George Orwell was an optimist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: george76

later


6 posted on 10/07/2023 3:13:30 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Two Words: Banana Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson