Posted on 10/21/2022 7:19:30 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
Three judges appointed by former President Donald Trump handed down an astonishing decision on Wednesday, effectively holding that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the federal agency charged with protecting consumers from a wide range of predatory activity by lenders and other financial services, is unconstitutional and must be stripped of its authority.
The decision by the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit relies on a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution, and is entirely at odds with a Supreme Court decision that rejects the Fifth Circuit’s reading of that provision. This is not unusual behavior from the Fifth Circuit, which often reads the Constitution in novel and unexpected ways that benefit political conservatives and the Republican Party.
Indeed, Judge Cory Wilson admits in the court’s new opinion in Community Financial Services v. CFPB that “every court to consider” the arguments presented in this case has deemed the CFPB to be “constitutionally sound.”
Should the three Trump judges’ decision stand, it would effectively neutralize much of the federal government’s ability to fight financial fraud — although that outcome probably is not likely given that the Fifth Circuit’s decision is such an outlier. As Wilson explains, the CFPB assumed enforcement authority “over 18 federal statutes” when it was formed nearly a dozen years ago, and these statutes “cover everything from credit cards and car payments to mortgages and student loans.”
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Lizzy Warren to go on WARPATH!.......................
I love the “Trump judges” and “Trumpiest” court angle. Trump appointed Federalist Society recommendations as judges just like every other Republican president for the past 40 years. Its one of the most consistent things he did as a Republican president. It works out great but the author trying to turn this into a “Trump” thing shows that he is either disingenuous or stupid.
Does anyone else find this sentence hilarious?
“a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution”
Really??
The idea that a Federal agency would not be accountable to the people through their funding source is abhorrent to the principle of self-government.
Elizabeth Warren SPECIFICALLY said that she wanted the agency to be insulated from the influence of the people through the Congress.
But let’s hear more about “DEMOCRACY”
Likely their reasoning is that the agency grabbed powers that can only come through the legislature. Dozens of such agencies have given themselves limitless powers.
“novel and unexpected”
~~~
I have no clue if what this court just did is something I would agree with or disagree with. However, this language is ripe with the fishy smell of propaganda. Novel and unexpected interpretation of the constitution? Three of them? uh huh
It’s a start.
“...relies on a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution,”
Translation: the Court is paying attention to what the Constitution actually says, not what liberals think it should say.
The constitution is hardly obscure in any content.
Quick! Somebody get cases about the ATF, FBI, CIA, NSA, HUD, etc, in front of these judges!
And does anyone, outside of conservative media, EVER refer to “Obama-appointed” judges for some of the most absurd decisions handed down in recent years (rhetorical question)?
Cool! Now do the CDC.
The feds fighting fraud is like MSNBC fighting take news
I seems the intent of the Constitution is to keep the discrecionary power to spend money in the hands of the people. By giving agencies a “blank check” that is off the people’s annual appropriation books is a deceptive financial practice that borders on money laundering. Why did the Congress need to do this? Answer: The have allocated power to the administrative state that exceeds the intent of the Constitution.
“means simply that no money can be paid out of the Treasury unless it has been appropriated by an act of Congress.” >>>. The reason for this qualification is important. SO the agencies cannot bypass a regular approval process. They cannot be self perpetuating. That is the point and a self perpetuating funding scheme is unconstitutional at the federal level.
They did not call it the ministry of truth...
When will democrats get it through their heads that anything that tries to circumvent the constitution is radical?
Good.
Congress delegated too many of its powers to bureaucratic “agencies” with regulation power that has the same power as law.
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.