Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

According to former director Richard Cordray, the bureau's priorities are mortgages, credit cards and student loans. The CFPB qualifies as a large independent agency that was designed to consolidate its employees and responsibilities from a number of other federal regulatory bodies, including the Federal Reserve, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration and even the Department of Housing and Urban Development.{{Cite journal|last=Van Loo|first=Rory|date=August 1, 2018|title=Regulatory Monitors: Policing Firms in the Compliance Era|url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/265|journal=Faculty Scholarship|volume=119 |issue=2 |page=369 }} The bureau is an independent unit located inside and funded by the United States Federal Reserve, with interim affiliation with the U.S. Treasury Department.{{citation needed|date=November 2017}}

The CFPB writes and enforces rules for financial institutions, examines both bank and non-bank financial institutions, monitors and reports on markets, as well as collects and tracks consumer complaints.{{cite web|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/09/14/factbox-new-us-consumer-financial-bureau-has-wide-powers/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100919154911/http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/09/14/factbox-new-us-consumer-financial-bureau-has-wide-powers/|url-status=dead|archive-date=September 19, 2010|title=FACTBOX-New US consumer financial bureau has wide powers|access-date=February 10, 2011|date=September 14, 2010|work=Reuters|last=Warren|first=Elizabeth|authorlink=Elizabeth Warren}}

The CFPB opened its website in early February 2011 to accept suggestions from consumers via YouTube, Twitter, and its own website interface. According to the United States Treasury Department, the bureau is tasked with the responsibility to "promote fairness and transparency for mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer financial products and services".{{cite web|url=http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2011/02/07/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-website-launched-open-suggestions/|title=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Website Launched and Open for Suggestions|access-date=February 10, 2011|date=February 7, 2011|website=mybanktracker.com|archive-date=February 10, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110210123912/http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2011/02/07/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-website-launched-open-suggestions/|url-status=dead}} According to its website, the CFPB's "central mission...is to make markets for consumer financial products and services work for Americans—whether they are applying for a mortgage, choosing among credit cards, or using any number of other consumer financial products".{{cite web|url=http://www.consumerfinance.gov/the-bureau/|title=Learn About the Bureau|access-date=February 10, 2011|publisher=United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}} In 2016 alone most of the hundreds and thousands of consumer complaints about their financial services—including banks and credit card issuers—were received and compiled by CFPB and are publicly available on a federal government database.{{cite news |url=https://apnews.com/d3b492915ca7457ca643ecd9a0d954f5/Public-window-on-financial-complaints-could-be-closing-soon? |work=Associated Press News |title=Public window on financial complaints could be closing soon |last=Freking |first=Kevin |date=April 23, 2017 |access-date=April 23, 2017}}

Once a financial institution acquires $10{{nbsp}}billion in assets, it falls under the guidance, rules, and regulations under the CFPB. The bank will then be known as a CFPB regulated bank. The CFPB will examine the institution for compliance with bank regulatory laws.{{cite web | url=https://independentbanker.org/2017/02/what-happens-when-a-bank-hits-10-billion/ | title= What happens when a bank hits $10 billion? | publisher=Independent Community Bankers of America}}

The regulations implemented by the Bureau are housed in Chapter X of Title XII Banks and Banking of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. Some notable examples include the ECOA (Equal Credit Opportunity Act – Regulation B), HMDA (Home Mortgage Disclosure Act – Regulation C), Alternative Mortgage Transaction Parity Act of 1982 (Regulation D), EFTA (Electronic Fund Transfer Act – Regulation E), FDCPA (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – Regulation F), FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act – Regulation V), RESPA (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act – Regulation X), TILA (Truth in Lending Act – Regulation Z), and Truth in Savings Act (Regulation DD).{{cite web | url=https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-X/ | title= Code of Federal Regulations – eCFR | publisher=Government Website}}{{cite news |url=https://www.marketwatch.com/guides/banking/what-is-the-cfpb/ |title=What Is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)? |website=MarketWatch |date=November 13, 2024| url-access=limited}}

In July 2010, Congress passed the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, during the 111th United States Congress in response to the Great Recession and 2008 financial crisis. The agency was originally proposed in 2007 by then-Harvard Law School professor Elizabeth Warren, who later became a US senator.{{cite journal|first1=Eric J.|last1=Mogilnicki|first2=Melissa S.|last2=Malpass|url=http://www.wilmerhale.com/uploadedFiles/WilmerHale_Shared_Content/Files/PDFs/TBL-mogilnicki-malpass-2013.pdf|title=The First Year of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: An Overview|journal=The Business Lawyer|publisher=American Bar Association|location=Chicago, Illinois|volume=68|issue=2|date=February 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131017060330/http://www.wilmerhale.com/uploadedFiles/WilmerHale_Shared_Content/Files/PDFs/TBL-mogilnicki-malpass-2013.pdf |archive-date=October 17, 2013}} The proposed CFPB was actively supported by Americans for Financial Reform, a newly created umbrella organization of some 250 consumer, labor, civil rights and other activist organizations.{{cite book |last1=Kirsch |first1=Larry |last2=Mayer |first2=Robert |title=Financial justice : the people's campaign to stop lender abuse |publisher=Praeger |location=Santa Barbara, California |year=2013 |isbn=978-1440829512}}

On September 17, 2010, President Barack Obama announced the appointment of Warren as Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to set up the new agency.{{cite web |url=https://money.cnn.com/2010/09/17/news/economy/Elizabeth_Warren_consumer_bureau/ |title=Obama names Warren as special adviser |website=CNNMoney |first1=Jennifer |last1=Liberto |date=September 17, 2010}}{{cite press release|title=President Obama Names Elizabeth Warren Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/17/president-obama-names-elizabeth-warren-assistant-president-and-special-a|via=National Archives|publisher=whitehouse.gov|date=September 17, 2010 |access-date=December 17, 2014}} Due to the way the legislation creating the bureau was written, until the first director was in place, the agency was not able to write new rules or supervise financial institutions other than banks.{{cite web|title=Introduction to Financial Services: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)|url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10031/8|website=CRS Reports|date=January 4, 2021|access-date=February 16, 2025}}

File:Nomination of Richard Cordray.jpg announces the nomination of Richard Cordray as the first director of the CFPB on July 18, 2011.]]

Elizabeth Warren, who proposed and established the CFPB, was removed from consideration as the bureau's first formal director after Obama administration officials became convinced Warren could not overcome strong Republican opposition.{{cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2011-sep-07-la-fi-consumer-bureau-cordray-20110907-story.html|title=GOP stalls confirmation of consumer agency nominee|date=September 7, 2011|last=Puzzanghera|first=Jim|work=Los Angeles Times}} On July 17, Obama nominated former Ohio attorney general and Ohio state treasurer Richard Cordray to be the first formal director of the CFPB.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/business/former-ohio-attorney-general-picked-to-lead-consumer-agency.html|title=Former Ohio Attorney General Picked to Lead Consumer Agency|access-date=July 17, 2011|date=July 17, 2011|work=The New York Times|last=Appelbaum|first=Binyamin|author-link=Binyamin Appelbaum}} Prior to his nomination, Cordray had been hired as chief of enforcement for the agency.{{cite web|url=http://www.cleveland.com/consumeraffairs/index.ssf/2010/12/outgoing_ohio_attorney_general.html|title=Outgoing Ohio Attorney General Cordray to go to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|access-date=February 10, 2011|date=December 15, 2010|work=The Plain Dealer|first=Sheryl|last=Harris|archive-date=December 21, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101221092145/http://www.cleveland.com/consumeraffairs/index.ssf/2010/12/outgoing_ohio_attorney_general.html|url-status=live}}

However, Cordray's nomination was immediately in jeopardy due to 44 Senate Republicans vowing to derail any nominee in order to encourage a decentralized structure of the organization. Senate Republicans had also shown a pattern of refusing to consider regulatory agency nominees.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/business/dodd-frank-under-fire-a-year-later.html|title=Dodd–Frank Under Fire a Year Later|access-date=July 22, 2011|date=July 18, 2011|work=The New York Times |last=Wyatt |first=Edward}}{{cite web |last=Epstein |first=Reid J. |date=July 21, 2011 |title=Richard Shelby: Richard Cordray is DOA |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59545.html |access-date=July 22, 2011 |work=Politico}}

The CFPB formally began operation on July 21, 2011.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/business/former-ohio-attorney-general-picked-to-lead-consumer-agency.html?_r=0&pagewanted=all|title=Former Ohio Attorney General Picked to Lead Consumer Agency|access-date=July 17, 2011|date=July 17, 2011|work=The New York Times|last=Appelbaum|first=Binyamin|author-link=Binyamin Appelbaum}}

Since the CFPB database was established in 2011, more than four million complaints have been published.{{cite web |title=Four million complaints: More than just a milestone |date=September 29, 2023 |url=https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/four-million-complaints-more-than-just-a-milestone/}} CFPB supporters include the Consumers Union claim that it is a "vital tool that can help consumers make informed decisions". CFPB detractors argue that the CFPB database is a "gotcha game" and that there is already a database maintained by the Federal Trade Commission although that information is not available to the public.

On January 4, 2012, Barack Obama issued a recess appointment to install Cordray as director through the end of 2013. This was a highly controversial move as the Senate was still holding pro forma sessions, and the possibility existed that the appointment could be challenged in court.{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/44/post/obama-to-use-executive-power-to-name-consumer-watchdog-chief-over-gop-objections/2012/01/04/gIQAVtFXaP_blog.html?hpid=z2 |title=Obama to use executive power to name consumer watchdog chief over GOP objections |access-date=January 4, 2012 |date=January 4, 2012 |newspaper=The Washington Post |last1=Nakamura |first1=David |author-link1=David Nakamura |last2=Sonmez |first2=Felicia |author-link2=Felicia Sonmez}} This type of recess appointment was unanimously ruled unconstitutional in NLRB v. Noel Canning.{{Cite web|url=https://www.vox.com/2014/6/26/5843366/recess-appointments-supreme-court|title=SCOTUS rules against Obama on recess appointments|first=Andrew|last=Prokop|date=June 26, 2014|website=Vox}}

On July 16, 2013, the Senate confirmed Cordray as director in a 66–34 vote.{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/07/16/202644353/cooling-tensions-senate-votes-to-advance-cordray-nomination|title=Cooling Tensions, Senate Confirms Cordray|access-date=July 19, 2013|date=July 16, 2013|publisher=NPR|last=Peralta|first=Eyder}} Cordray resigned in late 2017 to run for governor of Ohio.

The Financial CHOICE Act, proposed by the House Financial Services Committee's Jeb Hensarling, to repeal the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, passed the House on June 8, 2017. Also in June 2017, the Senate was crafting its own reform bill.{{cite news |title=House votes to kill Dodd-Frank. Now what? |first=Donna |last=Borak |quote=..."advanced the 'crown jewel' of the GOP-led regulatory reform effort, effectively gutting the Dodd-Frank financial regulations that were put in place during the Obama administration." |date=June 8, 2017 |access-date=June 9, 2017 |url=https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/08/news/economy/house-dodd-frank-repeal/index.html}}{{cite news |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/house-vote-on-financial-choice-act-wall-street-dodd-frank-regulation-2017-6 |work=Business Insider |title=The House quietly voted to destroy post-financial-crisis Wall Street regulations |date=June 9, 2017 |access-date=June 9, 2017 |first=Bob |last=Bryan}}

Testimony in US Congressional hearings of 2017 have elicited concerns that the wholesale publication of consumer complaints is both misleading and injurious to the consumer market. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) said at one such congressional hearing, "Is the purpose of the database just to name and shame companies? Or should they have a disclaimer on there that says it's a fact-free zone, or this is fake news? That's really what I see happening here." Bill Himpler, executive vice president of the American Financial Services Association, a trade group representing banks and other lenders responded "Something needs to be done." "Once the damage is done to a company, it's hard to get your reputation back.

Mick Mulvaney, as acting director of the CFPB, removed all 25 members of the agency's Consumer Advisory Board on June 5, 2018, after eleven of them held a press conference on June 3 in which they criticized him.{{cite news |last1=Merle |first1=Renae |title=Mick Mulvaney fires all 25 members of consumer watchdog's advisory board |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/06/06/mick-mulvaney-fires-members-of-cfpb-advisory-board/ |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=June 11, 2019 |date=June 6, 2018}}

On February 13, 2021, President Joe Biden formally submitted to the Senate the nomination of Rohit Chopra to serve as director of the CFPB.{{cite web |url=https://www.congress.gov/nomination/117th-congress/116 |title=PN116 — Rohit Chopra — Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection |website=U.S. Congress |access-date=February 14, 2021}} His nomination was approved on September 30, 2021, by a 50–48 vote.{{Cite news|last=Gregg|first=Aaron|date=September 30, 2021|title=Senate confirms Rohit Chopra to lead Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/09/30/rohit-chopra-cfpb/|access-date=September 30, 2021}}

In December 2021, CFPB fined LendUp $100,000 due to deceptive marketing and fair lending violations, and the company was required to stop issuing new loans.{{Cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-consumer-bureau-orders-fintech-firm-lendup-halt-new-loans-pay-fine-2021-12-21/|title=U.S. consumer bureau orders fintech firm LendUp to halt new loans, pay penalty|publisher=Reuters|date=December 22, 2021}}

In June 2024, the CFPB proposed banning using medical debt in credit reports or loan decisions.{{Cite news |last1=Diamond |first1=Dan |last2=Gregg |first2=Aaron |date=2024-06-12 |title=Biden proposes to ban medical debt from credit reports, loan decisions |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2024/06/11/biden-cfpb-medical-debt/ |access-date=2024-08-04 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}} In July 2024, the CFPB gave Zelle a choice between a settlement or litigation around its handling of fraud and scams on its platform.{{Cite news |last=Anand |first=Nupur |date=August 2, 2024 |title=JPMorgan considers suing consumer watchdog over Zelle |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/jpmorgan-considers-suing-consumer-watchdog-over-zelle-2024-08-02/ |work=Reuters}}

File:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau homepage screenshot February 2025.png

On February 1, 2025, Chopra was fired by President Donald Trump, making deputy director Zixta Martinez the acting director of the agency by operation of law.{{Cite news |last=Boak |first=Josh |date=February 1, 2025 |title=Trump fires the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau |url=https://apnews.com/article/trump-chopra-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-47b6b39d0eff05ea0c9bca4eacf55b79 |agency=The Associated Press}}{{Cite news |last=Cowley |first=Stacy |date=February 1, 2025 |title=Trump Administration Fires Consumer Bureau Chief Rohit Chopra |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/01/business/cfpb-rohit-chopra.html |access-date=February 1, 2025 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}} On February 3, Trump named Treasury Secretary and former hedge fund manager Scott Bessent as the agency's acting director. Bessent immediately ordered the agency to halt all work.{{Cite news |last=Wamsley |first=Laurel |date=February 3, 2025 |title= Treasury Secretary Bessent, tapped to run CFPB, orders staff to halt work |url= https://www.npr.org/2025/02/03/nx-s1-5285356/treasury-secretary-bessent-acting-cfpb-director |access-date=2025-02-04 |work=NPR |language=en-US }} On February 7, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought emailed CFPB staff to let them know he was the acting director of the agency.{{cite news |last1=Otterbein |first1=Holly |last2=Messerly |first2=Megan |title=Vought takes helm at CFPB after Musk incursion|url=https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/08/vought-takes-helm-at-cfpb-after-musk-incursion-00203247 |access-date=9 February 2025 |work=Politico |date=8 February 2025}} On February 10, Vought ordered all CFPB staff to cease all work between February 10 and 14, and closed the CFPB Washington headquarters.{{cite news |last1=Gillison |first1=Douglas |title=Consumer protection agency neutralized by Trump's new chief |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-acting-cfpb-chief-halts-all-supervision-companies-2025-02-09/ |access-date=10 February 2025 |work=Reuters |date=10 February 2025}}

In February 2025, the Bureau became a target of the Department of Government Efficiency, the Elon Musk-led team carrying out part of Trump's cost-cutting agenda. Staffers gained access to consumers' data.{{cite magazine |last1=Kelly |first1=Makena |title=DOGE Is Now Inside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau |url=https://www.wired.com/story/doge-access-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-data |access-date=February 8, 2025 |magazine=WIRED |date=February 7, 2025}} As of February 14, 2025, the agency's website homepage displays a 404 error, however other pages on the site remain active.{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |date=2025-02-14 |title=Trump admin pulls hundreds of videos from CFPB's YouTube channel |url=https://www.theverge.com/news/613567/trump-youtube-videos-cfpb |access-date=2025-02-17 |website=The Verge |language=en-US}} All content from the agency's social media accounts have been removed. CFPB workers have accused Musk of having a conflict of interest, as the agency was investigating several of his companies.{{cite web|first=Douglas|last=Gillison|work=Reuters|date=February 9, 2025|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-acting-cfpb-chief-halts-all-supervision-companies-2025-02-09/|title=Consumer protection agency neutralized by Trump's new chief|access-date=February 16, 2025}} "A public database shows hundreds of complaints about the electric car company Tesla, mostly concerning debt collection or loan problems," states the New York Times.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/11/us/politics/elon-musk-companies-conflicts.html/|title=Elon Musk's Business Empire Scores Benefits Under Trump Shake-Up|work=New York Times|author=Lipton, Eric; Grind, Kirsten|date=February 13, 2025|access-date=February 17, 2025}} Helaine Olen, from the American Economic Liberties Project, argues that closing down the CFPB "is an overt power grab by Big Tech — and their gain could result in the rest of us losing much more than almost anyone realizes."{{Cite web| first=Helaine | last=Olen| title = The closure of a consumer watchdog will help Elon Musk — but hurt the rest of us| work = MSNBC| access-date = February 11, 2025| date = February 10, 2025| url = https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-musk-shut-down-cfpb-big-tech-vought-rcna191479}}

On February 11, 2025, Vought restored the CFPB procedures that sustain the mortgage markets.{{Cite web| last = Dayen| first = David| title = Vought Restores CFPB Procedure That Sustains Mortgage Markets| work = The American Prospect| access-date = February 11, 2025| date = February 11, 2025| url = https://prospect.org/economy/2025-02-11-vought-restores-cfpb-procedure-that-sustains-mortgage-markets/}}

On February 14, 2025, a judge of the Federal District Court in Washington ordered officials at the CFPB not to “delete, destroy, remove or impair any data” or fire employees en masse. Immediately afterward, the agency's remaining employees were told to go on administrative leave until otherwise instructed.{{Cite news |last=Cowley |first=Stacy |date=2025-02-14 |title=Judge Orders Freeze on Firing Consumer Bureau's Staff and Deleting Its Data |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/us/politics/judge-cfpb-doge-trump.html |access-date=2025-02-17 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}

File:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (53844898134).jpg

From its creation until 2017, the CFPB "has curtailed abusive debt collection practices, reformed mortgage lending, publicized and investigated hundreds of thousands of complaints from aggrieved customers of financial institutions, and extracted nearly $12 billion for 29 million consumers in refunds and canceled debts."Steve Eder, Jessica Silver-Greenberg & Stacy Cowley, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/business/consumer-financial-protection-bureau.html Republicans Want to Sideline This Regulator. But It May Be Too Popular], The New York Times (August 31, 2017). That figure had risen to $19 billion by 2024.{{Cite web |last=Sherman |first=Mark |date=2024-05-16 |title=Supreme Court sides with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, spurning a conservative attack |url=https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-cfpb-consumer-protection-9f30de9bbfa5b25a47804b101fb998e8 |access-date=2024-08-04 |website=AP News |language=en}} Claims may be filed by individual customers and address a variety of unfair business practices by companies, such as refusals to remove errant fees, or to provide compensation for damages.{{Cite web |last=Sedensky |first=Matt |date=February 15, 2025 |title=Consumer watchdog agency called 'vicious' by Trump seen as a 'hero' to many it aided |url=https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-consumer-protection-cfpb-3690f473e8671fbf57a6cdca035e0d01 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20250215210930/https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-consumer-protection-cfpb-3690f473e8671fbf57a6cdca035e0d01 |archive-date=15 Feb 2025 |access-date=15 Feb 2025 |website=Associated Press}}

The CFPB has created a number of personal finance tools for consumers, including Ask CFPB, which compiles plain-language answers to personal finance questions, and Paying for College, which estimates the cost of attending specific universities based on the financial aid offers a student has received.{{cite news|last=Randall|first=Maya Jackson|author-link=Maya Jackson Randall|date=March 22, 2012|title=Consumer-protection agency launches 'Ask CFPB' tool|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2012/03/22/consumer-protection-agency-launches-ask-cfpb-tool/|access-date=August 7, 2013}}Liberto, Jennifer (April 11, 2012). "[https://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/pf/college/consumer_bureau_student_loans/index.htm Compare College Costs with Online Tool]". CNNMoney. Retrieved August 8, 2013.

In 2014, the CFPB attempted to help consumers understand the risks of cryptocurrencies.{{Cite web |date=2014-08-12 |title=Consumer protection agency urges Americans to beware of Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/consumer-protection-agency-urges-americans-beware-bitcoin-cryptocurrencies |access-date=2024-08-14 |website=PBS News |language=en-us}}

In 2016, the CFPB took its first enforcement action against a company that the CFPB alleged had failed to properly protect the privacy and security of consumers' data.{{Cite web|title=Dwolla Fined $100,000 by CFPB in First Data Security Enforcement Action|url=https://www.natlawreview.com/article/dwolla-fined-100000-cfpb-first-data-security-enforcement-action|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160309110145/http://www.natlawreview.com/article/dwolla-fined-100000-cfpb-first-data-security-enforcement-action |archive-date=March 9, 2016}}

In 2024, the Bureau limited credit card late fees to $8.{{Cite news |last=Raymond |first=Nate |date=July 9, 2024 |title=CFPB says US Supreme Court rulings justify reviving credit card fees rule |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/cfpb-says-us-supreme-court-rulings-justify-reviving-credit-card-fees-rule-2024-07-09/ |work=Reuters}} The rule was blocked by a judge, but the reason given for the block was overturned by the Supreme Court, giving the Bureau confidence that the rule will be implemented.

A 2013 press release from the United States House Financial Services Committee criticized the CFPB for what was described as a "radical structure" that "is controlled by a single individual who cannot be fired for poor performance and who exercises sole control over the agency, its hiring and its budget." Moreover, the committee alleged a lack of financial transparency and a lack of accountability to Congress or the president. Committee vice chairman Patrick McHenry, expressed particular concern about travel costs and a $55 million renovation of CFPB headquarters, stating "$55 million is more than the entire annual construction and acquisition budget for GSA for the totality of federal buildings."{{cite press release |last1=Hensarling |first1=Jeb |author1-link=Jeb Hensarling |date=June 18, 2013 |title=CFPB Lacks Oversight and Accountability |url=http://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=339512 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170516101416/http://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=339512 |archive-date=May 16, 2017 |access-date=May 18, 2017 |publisher=U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee |language=en}}

In 2014, some employees and former employees of the CFPB testified before Congress about an alleged culture of racism and sexism at the agency. Former employees testified they were retaliated against for bringing problems to the attention of superiors.{{cite web|last=Devaney|first=Tim|date=June 18, 2014|title=Ex-staffer: CFPB run like a 'plantation'|url=https://thehill.com/regulation/209869-ex-cfpb-employee-compares-it-to-working-at-a-plantation/|website=The Hill}}{{cite web |last1=Lee |first1=M. J. |title=Worker alleges CFPB 'trail of victims' |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/cfpb-workplace-discrimination-105310 |website=POLITICO |language=en |date=2 April 2014}}

House Republicans criticized the methodology the CFPB uses to identify instances of racial discrimination among auto lenders. Because of legal constraints, the agency used a system to "guess" the race of auto loan applicants based on their last name and listed address. Based on that information, the agency charged several lenders were discriminating against minority applicants and levied large fines and settlements against those companies. Ally Financial paid $98 million in fines and settlement fees in 2013.{{Cite news |last=Moyer |first=Liz |date=2015-11-25 |title=Consumer Bureau Faulted on Auto Lending Inquiry |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/26/business/dealbook/house-report-increases-pressure-on-cfpb.html |access-date=2024-08-14 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}} As the agency's methodology means it can only guess who may be victims of discrimination entitled to settlement funds, as of late 2015, the CFPB had yet to compensate any individuals who were victims of Ally's allegedly discriminatory practices. In 2016, the House voted to overturn its 2013 guidance, with 88 Democrats joining House Republicans.{{Cite news |last=Finkle |first=Victoria |date=2016-03-16 |title=House Republicans Clash With Consumer Protection Unit Chief |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/business/dealbook/house-republicans-clash-with-consumer-protection-unit-chief.html |access-date=2024-08-14 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}

Cordray was accused but cleared of any violations of the Hatch Act as Director of the CFPB after being investigated by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC).{{cite news |last1=Manchester |first1=Julia |title=Consumer chief didn't violate ethics rules, agency says |url=https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/358733-consumer-chief-didnt-violate-ethics-rules-agency-says/ |access-date=15 November 2023 |work=The Hill |date=3 November 2017}}{{Relevance inline|date=August 2024}}

On May 21, 2018, US president Donald Trump signed into law Congressional legislation repealing the enforcement of automobiles lending rules.{{cite web|last=Warmbrodt|first=Zachary|date=May 21, 2018|title=Trump signs bill blocking consumer bureau auto-lending measure|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/trump-signs-bill-blocking-cfpb-auto-lending-measure-558281|access-date=May 25, 2018|work=Politico}} On May 24, 2018, Trump signed into law the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act, exempting dozens of banks from the CFPB's regulations.{{cite web|last=Sherman|first=Erik|date=May 24, 2018|title=Scaling back Dodd-Frank is just the beginning of Trump's run on deregulation|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/scaling-back-dodd-frank-just-beginning-trump-s-run-deregulation-n877031|access-date=May 25, 2018|work=NBC News}}

On September 26, 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2013 (H.R. 3193; 113th Congress) was introduced into the United States House of Representatives.{{cite web|title=H.R. 3193 – Summary|url=http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/3193|publisher=United States Congress|access-date=February 11, 2014}} The bill would have created a five-person commission and removed it from the Federal Reserve System.{{cite news|last=Kasperowicz|first=Pete|title=House to take another swing at Dodd–Frank reform|url=https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/economics-trade/197799-house-will-take-another-swing-at-dodd-frank-reform/|access-date=February 11, 2014|newspaper=The Hill|date=February 7, 2014}} The CFPB would have been renamed the "Financial Product Safety Commission". The bill was also intended to make it easier to override the CFPB decisions. It passed in the House of Representatives on February 27, 2014, and was received by the Senate on March 4.{{cite web|title=H.R. 3193 – Consumer Financial Freedom and Washington Accountability Act|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/3193|website=congress.gov|date=March 4, 2014 |access-date=October 17, 2015}} It was never considered in the Democratic controlled Senate.{{cite web|last1=Lunsford|first1=Patrick|title=CFPB Reform Bill Introduced in House Designed to Pass Congress|url=http://www.insidearm.com/daily/collection-laws-regulations/collection-laws-and-regulations/cfpb-reform-bill-introduced-in-house-designed-to-pass-congress/|website=insidearm.com|access-date=October 17, 2015|date=March 5, 2015}}

{{Further|Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act#Constitutional challenge to Dodd–Frank}}

Two lawsuits were filed in the early years of the CFPB; they were both dismissed by federal courts, but one was appealed and is still ongoing.

The first one, filed on June 21, 2012, by a Texas bank along with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, challenged the constitutionality of provisions of the CFPB.{{cite web|last=Hall|first=Christine|title=Dodd–Frank Unconstitutional Power-Grab, Says New Lawsuit|url=http://cei.org/news-releases/dodd-frank-unconstitutional-power-grab-says-new-lawsuit|work=Competitive Enterprise Institute|date=June 21, 2012 |publisher=Competitive Enterprise Institute}} One year later, in August 2013, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit because the plaintiffs had failed to show that they had suffered harm.{{cite press release|date=August 2, 2013|title=Standing Alone, But Firm; Morgan Drexen Presses Forth in Lawsuit Against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/08/03/564367/10043262/en/Standing-Alone-But-Firm-Morgan-Drexen-Presses-Forth-in-Lawsuit-Against-the-Consumer-Financial-Protection-Bureau.html|access-date=May 18, 2014|publisher=GlobeNewswire}}

In July 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that the bank, but not the states that later joined the lawsuit, had standing to challenge the law, and returned the case for further proceedings.{{cite news|last1=Adler|first1=Jonathan H.|author-link1=Jonathan H. Adler|date=July 24, 2015|title=D.C. Circuit revives constitutional challenge to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/24/d-c-circuit-revives-constitutional-challenge-to-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|access-date=August 10, 2015}}[http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/961BA5A070E7A5CF85257E8C0050F258/$file/13-5247.pdf State National Bank of Big Spring, et al. v. Lew], no. 13-5247 (D.C. Cir, July 24, 2015).

A lawsuit filed July 22, 2013, by Morgan Drexen Integrated Systems, a provider of outsourced administrative support services to attorneys, and Connecticut attorney Kimberly A. Pisinski, challenged the constitutionality of the CFPB.{{cite web|last=Pollock|first=Richard|date=July 23, 2013|title=Private firm sues CFPB, challenges board's constitutionality|url=http://washingtonexaminer.com/private-firm-sues-cfpb-challenges-boards-constitutionality/article/2533354|access-date=August 11, 2013|work=Washington Examiner}}{{cite web|last=Karmasek|first=Jessica M.|date=August 10, 2013|title=Conn. attorney, support services provider sue CFPB over alleged 'data mining'|url=http://legalnewsline.com/news/federal-government/243066-conn-attorney-support-services-provider-sue-cfpb-over-alleged-data-mining|access-date=August 11, 2013|work=Legal Newsline}} The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleged that the "CFPB's structure insulates it from political accountability and internal checks and balances in violation of the United States Constitution. Unbridled from constitutionally-required accountability, CFPB has engaged in ultra vires and abusive practices, including attempts to regulate the practice of law (a function reserved for state bars), attempts to collect attorney-client protected material, and overreaching demands for, and mining of, personal financial information of American citizens, which has prompted a Government Accountability Office ("GAO") investigation, commenced on July 12, 2013."{{cite web|title=Morgan Drexen Filings|url=http://morgandrexenvscfpb.com/filings/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130830042857/http://morgandrexenvscfpb.com/filings/|archive-date=August 30, 2013|access-date=August 11, 2013|publisher=Morgan Drexen}}

On August 22, 2013, one month after Morgan Drexen's lawsuit, the CFPB filed its own lawsuit against Morgan Drexen in the United States District Court for the Central District of California alleging that Morgan Drexen charged advance fees for debt relief services in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule and engaged in deceptive acts and practices in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).{{cite web|last=Kaplinsky|first=Alan|date=August 23, 2013|title=A tale of two lawsuits: CFPB sues Morgan Drexen|url=http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/a-tale-of-two-lawsuits-cfpb-sues-morgan-62630/|access-date=November 8, 2013|website=JD Supra Law News}} The CFPB won this lawsuit and Morgan Drexen was ordered to pay $132,882,488 in restitution and a $40 million civil penalty.{{cite web|date=March 18, 2016|title=CFPB Wins Final Judgment Against Morgan Drexen for Illegal Debt-Relief Scheme|url=http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-wins-final-judgment-against-morgan-drexen-for-illegal-debt-relief-scheme/|access-date=June 17, 2016}}

In October 2016, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that it was unconstitutional for the CFPB director to be removable by the president of the United States only for cause, such as "inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance."{{cite news|last1=Cowley|first1=Stacy|date=October 12, 2016|title=Court Upholds Consumer Agency, Minus Its Leader's Job Security|page=B2|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/business/dealbook/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-court-ruling-unconstitutional.html?_r=1|access-date=October 18, 2016}} Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Senior Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph, wrote that the law was "a threat to individual liberty" and instead found that the president could remove the CFPB director at will. Circuit Judge Karen L. Henderson agreed that the CFPB Director had been wrong in adopting a new interpretation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, finding the statute of limitations did not apply to the CFPB, and fining the petitioning mortgage company PHH Corporation $109 million, but she dissented from giving the president a new power to remove the director, citing constitutional avoidance.{{cite news|last1=Frankel|first1=Alison|date=October 11, 2016|title=The D.C. Circuit's gratuitous ruling on CFPB constitutionality|work=Reuters|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2016/10/11/the-d-c-circuits-gratuitous-ruling-on-cfpb-constitutionality/|url-status=dead|access-date=October 18, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161015123334/http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2016/10/11/the-d-c-circuits-gratuitous-ruling-on-cfpb-constitutionality/|archive-date=October 15, 2016}} The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the decision and ordered en banc review.{{cite web|date=October 11, 2016|title=PHH Corporation v. CFPB, No. 15-1177 (D.C. Cir. 2017)|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-1177/15-1177-2017-02-16.html|access-date=November 27, 2017|website=Justia}} On January 31, 2018, the en banc D.C. Circuit found that the CFPB's structure was constitutional by a vote of 7–3. Judge Cornelia Pillard, writing for the majority, found that the Take Care Clause does not forbid independent agencies, while each of the circuit judges from the earlier panel wrote separate dissents.{{cite news|last1=Weiss|first1=Debra Cassens|date=31 January 2018|title=Full DC Circuit upholds structure of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|language=en|work=ABA Journal|url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/full_dc_circuit_upholds_structure_of_consumer_financial_protection_bureau|access-date=5 April 2018}}

In June 2018, New York Federal District Court judge Loretta Preska ruled against its structure.{{cite news|last1=Hayashi|first1=Yuka|date=22 June 2018|title=Judge Rules Against Bureau's Structure|page=A5|work=The Wall Street Journal|publisher=Dow Jones/News Corp|volume=CCLXXI|issue=145|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-based-judge-rules-cfpbs-structure-is-unconstitutional-1529616526}}{{cite web|last=Lane|first=Sylvan|date=June 21, 2018|title=Federal court rules consumer bureau structure unconstitutional|url=https://thehill.com/policy/finance/393510-federal-court-rules-consumer-bureau-structure-unconstitutional/|access-date=May 29, 2019|work=The Hill}}

In January 2019, the Supreme Court denied review of the DC Circuit Court decision.{{cite web|title=State National Bank of Big Spring v. Mnuchin|url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/state-national-bank-of-big-spring-v-mnuchin/|access-date=May 29, 2019|publisher=SCOTUSblog}}

In October 2019, the Supreme Court announced it would review the constitutionality of the Bureau's structure in the case Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau considering the split decision of the lower courts.{{cite web|title=Justices to review constitutionality of CFPB structure|date=October 18, 2019 |url=https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/10/justices-to-review-constitutionality-of-cfpb-structure/|access-date=November 30, 2019|publisher=SCOTUSblog}} Oral arguments began on March 3, 2020.{{cite web|last=Liptak|first=Adam|author-link=Adam Liptak|date=March 3, 2020|title=Supreme Court Divided on Trump's Power to Fire Head of Consumer Bureau|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/03/us/supreme-court-consumer-bureau.html|access-date=March 3, 2020|work=The New York Times}}

On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5–4 decision that the firing protections of the director are an unconstitutional restraint on the president's ability to oversee executive branch agencies. "Such an agency lacks a foundation in historical practice and clashes with constitutional structure by concentrating power in a unilateral actor insulated from Presidential control," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, which was joined by his conservative colleagues.{{Cite web |last=Neidig |first=Harper |date=2020-06-29 |title=Supreme Court rules consumer bureau director can be fired at will|url=https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/505000-supreme-court-rules-consumer-bureau-director-can-be-fired-at-will/|url-access=subscription|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200701074749/https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/505000-supreme-court-rules-consumer-bureau-director-can-be-fired-at-will/|archive-date=2020-07-01|access-date=2025-01-24|website=TheHill|language=en}} The statutes around the Director's position on the CFPB were considered severable from the remaining structure of the CFPB, and the Court ordered that "The agency may therefore continue to operate, but its Director, in light of our decision, must be removable by the President at will." The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Elena Kagan, stated that the majority's decision has the court "second-guessing" the two political branches of government (Congress and the president) on how to structure the executive branch and "wipes out a feature of [the CFPB] its creators thought fundamental to its mission—a measure of independence from political pressure."{{cite web|last1=Mangan|first1=Dan|last2=Higgens|first2=Tucker|date=June 29, 2020|title=Supreme Court leaves consumer regulator standing but backs president's ability to fire director|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html|access-date=June 29, 2020|work=CNBC}}

{{See also|English v. Trump}}

On November 24, 2017, Director Cordray appointed Leandra English to the position of deputy director, and announced that he would leave office at the close of business that day.{{cite web|url=https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-efff-d90d-a37f-ffff72670000|title=Note to staff from Director Cordray|website=Politico }}Tara Siegel Bernard, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/us/politics/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-cordray-leader-trump-mulvaney.html Dueling Appointments Lead to Clash at Consumer Protection Bureau], The New York Times (November 24, 2017). Cordray indicated that would make English the acting director after his resignation,{{cite web|title=Leandra English Named Deputy Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/leandra-english-named-deputy-director-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|publisher=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|access-date=November 25, 2017|location=Washington, D.C.|date=November 24, 2017}} citing provisions of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act providing that the deputy director of the CFPB becomes acting director in the "absence or unavailability" of the director.Alison Frankel, [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-cfpb/cfpbs-controversial-structure-looms-over-leadership-showdown-idUSKBN1DR2MZ CFPB's controversial structure looms over leadership showdown], Reuters (November 27, 2017). Later the same day, however, President Donald Trump appointed the incumbent director of the Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney, as acting director, citing the authority of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998.

On November 25, the Office of Legal Counsel released an opinion, written by Assistant Attorney General Steven Engel, asserting that the President has the authority under the FVRA to designate an acting CFPB Director. The OLC memo maintained that "both the Vacancies Reform Act and [§1011(b)(5) of Dodd–Frank] are available for filling on an acting basis a vacancy that results from the resignation of the CFPB's Director" but that "when the President designates an individual...outside the ordinary order of succession, the President's designation necessarily controls."{{Cite web|url=https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/attachments/2017/11/25/cfpb_acting_director_olc_op_0.pdf|title=Memorandum for Donald F. McGahn II, Counsel to the President}} This position was also supported by the General Counsel of the CFPB, Mary E. McLeod.{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/11/26/who-is-leandra-english-the-woman-at-the-center-of-a-white-house-battle-for-control-of-the-cfpb/|title=Leandra English, the woman at the center of a White House battle for control of the CFPB, files lawsuit against Trump pick to lead watchdog agency|last=Merle|first=Renae|date=November 26, 2017|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286}}{{Cite news|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/26/consumer-bureau-trump-english-cordray-260062|title=Consumer bureau's top lawyer sides with Trump in leadership clash|last=Woellert|first=Lorraine|date=November 26, 2017|work=Politico|access-date=November 27, 2017}}

On November 26, English (represented by former CFPB senior counsel Deepak Gupta) filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia seeking a temporary restraining order and declaratory judgment to prevent Mulvaney from becoming acting director,{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/business/trump-cfpb-consumer-agency.html|title=Battle for Control of Consumer Agency Heads to Court|last=Cowley|first=Stacy|date=November 26, 2017|work=The New York Times|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}} Mulvaney was given access by unnamed individuals with the keys to the director's office on November 27 and ordered all CFPB employees to disregard any claims from English that she is the acting director.{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/11/27/at-the-cfpb-two-acting-directors-show-up-to-take-command-one-brings-doughnuts-the-other-well-wishes/|title=At the CFPB, two acting directors show up to take command; one brings doughnuts, the other well-wishes|last=Merle|first=Renae|date=November 27, 2017|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286}} Both English and Mulvaney sent emails to the entire 1,600-person staff of the CFPB, each signing as "Acting Director" of the agency.Katie Rogers, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/us/politics/cfpb-leandra-english-mulvaney.html Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Has 2 Bosses Claiming Control], The New York Times (November 27, 2017).Patrick Rucker, Richard Cowan, [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-cfpb-memo/directors-duel-over-control-of-u-s-consumer-protection-agency-idUSKBN1DR1UD Directors duel over control of U.S. consumer protection agency], Reuters (November 27, 2017). On November 28, 2017, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly, who had been appointed by President Trump just a few months earlier, denied English's motion for a preliminary injunction and allowed Mulvaney to begin serving as CFPB acting director.{{cite news|last1=Rogers|first1=Katie|last2=Bernard|first2=Tara Siegel|title=President Wins Round in the Battle for the Consumer Bureau|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/us/politics/mick-mulvaney-leandra-english-consumer-bureau.html|access-date=4 April 2018|work=The New York Times|date=29 November 2017|page=A16}}

{{See also|Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}}

Seila Law LLC (Seila Law), a law firm that provided debt relief services, was under investigation by the CFPB. As part of its investigation, the CFPB issued a civil investigative demand (CID) to Seila Law, which required Seila Law to produce certain documents. Seila Law declined to comply with the CID and challenged the constitutionality of the CFPB. The CFPB brought a motion to enforce the CID to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, where District Judge Josephine Staton granted the motion after finding the CFPB was constitutionally structured.{{Cite court|litigants=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Seila Law LLC|court=United States District Court for the Central District of California|reporter=F__|vol=___|opinion=___|date=August 25, 2017|url=http://www.lenderlawwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2019/05/Seila-District-Court-opinion.pdf}}

Seila Law's appeal to the Ninth Circuit was dismissed. The 9th Circuit panel affirmed the District Court's ruling, and agreed that the Supreme Court's prior decisions upholding for-cause removal in Humphrey's Executor and Morrison were "controlling".{{Cite court|litigants=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Seila Law LLC|court=9th Cir.|reporter=F.3d|vol=923|opinion=680|date=May 6, 2019|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3534329657244473955}} It also referred approvingly to the en banc decision of the DC Circuit in PHH Corp. v. CFPB (2018), in which the Circuit found that the structure of the CFPB was constitutional.{{Cite court|litigants=PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|court=D.C. Cir.|reporter=F.3d|vol=881|opinion=75|date=January 31, 2018|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3534329657244473955}}

There was arguably a circuit split on the question presented in Seila Law. While the Ninth Circuit and DC Circuit had held that the CFPB's structure is constitutional, the Fifth Circuit in Collins v. Mnuchin (2018) held that the structure of the Federal Housing Finance Agency—another agency whose director can be removed only for cause—violated the separation of powers.{{Cite web|last=Adler|first=Jonathan H.|author-link=Jonathan H. Adler|date=2019-10-18|title=Is the CFPB Unconstitutional? We'll Soon Find Out.|url=https://reason.com/2019/10/18/is-the-cfpb-unconstitutional-well-soon-find-out/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200621091406/https://reason.com/2019/10/18/is-the-cfpb-unconstitutional-well-soon-find-out/|archive-date=2020-06-21|access-date=2020-06-20|website=The Volokh Conspiracy}}

The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Seila Law on October 18, 2019, and heard oral argument on March 3, 2020.{{Cite web|title=Case File: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200616212949/https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|archive-date=2020-06-16|access-date=2020-06-20|website=SCOTUSblog}}

The Court issued its decision on June 29, 2020. The 5–4 decision ruled that the CFPB structure, with a sole director that could only be terminated for cause, was unconstitutional as it violated the separation of powers, vacating the lower court judgement and remanding the case for review. The Court recognized that the statutes around the director of the CFPB was severable from the rest of the statute establishing the agency, and thus "The agency may therefore continue to operate, but its Director, in light of our decision, must be removable by the President at will."{{cite web | url = https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html | title = Supreme Court leaves consumer regulator standing but backs president's ability to fire director | first1 = Dan | last1 = Mangan | first2 = Tucker | last2 = Higgens | date = June 29, 2020 | access-date = June 29, 2020 | work = CNBC | archive-date = June 29, 2020 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200629150200/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html | url-status = live }}

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion joined by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. Roberts wrote that the CFPB structure with a single point of leadership that could only be removed for cause "has no foothold in history or tradition", and has only been used in four other instances: three current uses for the United States Office of Special Counsel, the Social Security Administration, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and temporarily for one year during the American Civil War for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Roberts wrote that the three current uses "are modern and contested. And they do not involve regulatory or enforcement authority comparable to that exercised by the CFPB." Roberts also wrote that the CFPB structure "is also incompatible with the structure of the Constitution, which—with the sole exception of the Presidency—scrupulously avoids concentrating power in the hands of any single individual." Roberts referred back to the precedent established by Humphrey's Executor and Morrison as a basis for the majority's decision.{{cite web |url=https://reason.com/2020/06/29/with-chief-in-charge-scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-law-and-eliminates-cfpb-independence/ |title=With Chief in Charge, SCOTUS Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Law and Eliminates CFPB Independence |first=Jonathan |last=Adler |author-link=Jonathan H. Adler |date=June 29, 2020 |access-date=June 29, 2020 |work=Reason |archive-date=June 29, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200629232919/https://reason.com/2020/06/29/with-chief-in-charge-scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-law-and-eliminates-cfpb-independence/ |url-status=live}}

Justice Elena Kagan wrote the dissent joined by justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor. Kagan wrote that "Today's decision wipes out a feature of that agency its creators thought fundamental to its mission—a measure of independence from political pressure." Kagan challenged the separation of powers argument presented by the majority: "Nowhere does the text [of the Constitution] say anything about the President's power to remove subordinate officials at will." The dissenting Justices did concur on the matter of severability of the remaining structure of the CFPB outside of the director.

{{main|Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Limited}}

In 2018, the Community Financial Services Association of America sued the CFPB over its 2017 rule that blocked lenders to attempt to collect funds from borrowers' accounts after two consecutive failed attempts, unless the borrower had consented. Part of its argument in the case was that the CFPB's budgetary structure was unconstitutional, as it did not receive funding through Congressional appropriations but requested its funding through the Federal Reserve. While the district court ruled against the association, the Fifth Circuit ruled in favor of the association in October 2022, deeming that its funding structure was unconstitutional.{{cite web | url = https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-consumer-protection-watchdogs-funding-unconstitutional-court-rules-2022-10-20/ | title = U.S. consumer protection watchdog's funding unconstitutional, court rules | first = Nate | last = Redmond |date = October 20, 2022 | access-date = October 20, 2022 | work = Reuters }}

That opinion was appealed to the US Supreme Court, which reversed the 5th Circuit and upheld the CFPB's funding mechanism.{{cite news |last1=Johnson |first1=Jake |title=Existential Threat to CFPB Spotlights Massive Stakes of New Supreme Court Term |url=https://www.commondreams.org/news/cfpb-supreme-court |access-date=15 November 2023 |work=www.commondreams.org |date=2 October 2023 |language=en}} May 2024, the Court ruled for the CFPB in a 7–2 decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas.{{Cite web|date=May 16, 2024|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/16/supreme-court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-funding-structure-is-legal.html|website=CNBC|title=Supreme Court Rules Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Funding Structure is Legal}}

; Status

{{legend|#FAF0E6|Special Advisor|border=black}}

{{legend|#E6E6AA|Acting Director|border=black}}

{{Portal|United States|Politics|Business and economics}}

• Regulatory responses to the subprime crisis
• Subprime mortgage crisis solutions debate
• Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations
• Volcker Rule
• Wall Street reform
• List of financial regulatory authorities by jurisdiction

{{notelist}}

{{Reflist}}

{{sister project links|d=Q1091543|c=Category:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|n=Category:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|s=no|b=no|v=no|voy=no|m=no|mw=no|species=no|q=no|wikt=no}}

• {{Official website}}
• {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250207082647/https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ |date=February 7, 2025 |title=Consumer Financial Protection Board}}
• [https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/consumer-financial-protection-bureau Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] in the Federal Register
• [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-X 12 CFR Chapter X] of the Code of Federal Regulations

{{Bank regulation in the United States}}

{{Economic Crisis}}

{{CFPB Directors}}

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}}

Category:Financial regulatory authorities of the United States

Category:Consumer protection in the United States

Category:Consumer rights agencies

Category:Independent agencies of the United States government

Category:Corporate crime

Category:Government agencies established in 2011

Category:2011 establishments in Washington, D.C.