U.S. Supreme Court Upholds CFPB Funding Structure

Eric Mogilnicki’s commentary was included in a Lexology Pro article covering the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) funding mechanism is constitutional.

Eric provides his insight on the ruling, saying that the justices’ varied opinions demonstrate a range of perspectives on the CFPB itself, and that the majority opinion describes the CFPB as having "sweeping authority" and diminished accountability to Congress, but finds that neither offends the appropriations clause. “The opinions, save the Jackson concurrence, treat the constitutional issue as one to be resolved through detailed historical research,” he said. “The majority opinion and the dissent reach back as far as the Middle Ages, only to reach opposite conclusions about the provenance of the bureau's funding structure.”

Eric added the decision will also affect several enforcement matters that had been pending. “While some may predict that surviving this constitutional challenge will embolden the CFPB, there has been little indication that the Bureau was holding back on exercising its authority while CFSA was pending,” he noted.