The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CPFB) was originally created by congress (Elizabeth Warren lead) as a quasi-constitutional watchdog agency to reach into the banking in addition to also financial system, under the guise of oversight, in addition to also extract money by fining entities for CFPB defined regulatory in addition to also/or compliance violations.
Essentially, the CFPB will be a congressionally authorized far-left extortion scheme inside banking sector. The CFPB levies fines; the fines generate income; however, unlike traditional fines in which go to the U.S. treasury, the CFBP fines are then redistributed to left-wing organizations to help fund their political activism.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren as an outcome of the Dodd-Frank legislation. Within the CFPB Warren tried to set up the head of the agency, the Director, in a manner in which in which he/she might operate without oversight. Unfortunately, her dictatorial-fiat-design collapsed when challenged in court. Backstory #1 – Backstory #2
A federal court found the CFPB Director position held too much power in addition to also deemed in which unconstitutional. The court decision noted in which giving the President power to fire the Director might fix the constitutional problem. This particular issue was argued extensively after President Trump appointed Mick Mulvaney as interim Director. Elizabeth Warren declaring the CFPB Director could not be fired by the executive. The legal battle worked its way to the Supreme Court.
♦ Today the Supreme Court ruled (full pdf here) the structure of the CFPB Director position will be unconstitutional in addition to also the President can fire the head of the agency. However, SCOTUS kept the CFPB agency in place by severing the part of the law in which created the agency head via the rest of the law.
The CFPB remains as a quasi-constitutional agency; the CFPB remains an extortion racket to target any organization within the banking in addition to also finance sector; however, the president can fire in addition to also appoint the Director of the CFPB.
The decision could have significant implications for the future of the similarly structured Federal Housing Finance Agency, the overseer of mortgage giants Fannie Mae in addition to also Freddie Mac. like the head of the CFPB, the FHFA director will be appointed to a all 5-year term in addition to also can only be removed for cause. ~ Politico
BACKSTORY: When Senator Elizabeth Warren in addition to also crew set up the Director of the CFPB, inside aftermath of the Dodd-Frank Act, they made in which in order in which the appointed director can only be fired for cause by the President.
This particular design was so the Director could operate outside the control of congress in addition to also outside the control of the White House. In essence the CFPB director position was created to work above the reach of any oversight; almost like a tenured position no-one could ever remove.
The position was intentionally put together in order in which he/she might be untouchable, in addition to also the ideologue occupying the position might work on the goals of the CFPB without any oversight.
Elizabeth Warren herself wanted to be the appointed director; however, the reality of her never passing senate confirmation made her drop out.
The CFPB Director has the power to regulate pensions, retirement investment, mortgages, bank loans, credit cards in addition to also essentially every aspect of all consumer financial transactions.
However, in response to legal challenges by Credit Unions in addition to also Mortgage providers, in October 2016 the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in which placing so much power in an individual Czar or Commissioner was unconstitutional:
[…] The all 5-year-old agency violates the Constitution’s separation of powers because too much power will be inside hands of its director, found the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Giving the president the power to get rid of the CFPB’s director in addition to also to oversee the agency might fix the situation, the court said. (more)
After the November 8, 2016, election (during the lame-duck Obama period), the CFPB sought an en banc review of the decision by the circuit court panel. However, in March 2017 the Trump administration reversed the government’s position.
Today the Supreme Court finally settled the issue.