Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Supreme Court considers options in reviewing consumer bureau's structure
Source: Washington Post
Supreme Court considers options in reviewing consumer bureau’s structure
By Robert Barnes
3/3/2020, 6:15:13 p.m.
The Supreme Court has plenty of options if it agrees with the Trump administration that Congress went too far in insulating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from political pressure by forbidding the president to fire its director without cause.
But it was unclear after more than an hour of arguments Tuesday which remedy, if any, might garner the five votes necessary to make a majority.
In general, the liberal justices were protective of the bureau and, by extension, similar independent federal agencies. The conservatives are suspicious of government institutions — as a judge before joining the high court, Brett M. Kavanaugh worried about the “headless fourth branch of government” — and fond of a “unitary executive” approach in which all roads of responsibility lead straight to the president.
If the two sides are unable to agree, Paul Clement, the lawyer appointed by the court to defend the legality of the CFPB since the Trump administration declined to, suggested an out: Decide the case at hand as narrowly as possible and leave the weighty constitutional issues for another day.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed that the question before the court had an “academic quality” to it. Does it intrude on the president’s constitutional authority to direct the executive branch if he is not free to fire the CFPB’s director?
-snip-
By Robert Barnes
3/3/2020, 6:15:13 p.m.
The Supreme Court has plenty of options if it agrees with the Trump administration that Congress went too far in insulating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from political pressure by forbidding the president to fire its director without cause.
But it was unclear after more than an hour of arguments Tuesday which remedy, if any, might garner the five votes necessary to make a majority.
In general, the liberal justices were protective of the bureau and, by extension, similar independent federal agencies. The conservatives are suspicious of government institutions — as a judge before joining the high court, Brett M. Kavanaugh worried about the “headless fourth branch of government” — and fond of a “unitary executive” approach in which all roads of responsibility lead straight to the president.
If the two sides are unable to agree, Paul Clement, the lawyer appointed by the court to defend the legality of the CFPB since the Trump administration declined to, suggested an out: Decide the case at hand as narrowly as possible and leave the weighty constitutional issues for another day.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed that the question before the court had an “academic quality” to it. Does it intrude on the president’s constitutional authority to direct the executive branch if he is not free to fire the CFPB’s director?
-snip-
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/2020/03/03/83896dca-5d7b-11ea-b29b-9db42f7803a7_story.html
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
