Politics

New York Attorney General Letitia James leads multistate effort defending CFPB to the Supreme Court

Key Points
  • Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court to urge the justices to overturn a decision that threatens the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
  • The court agreed to hear arguments in the case after the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the CFPB's funding source is unconstitutional.
  • The brief comes a day after dozens of current and former Democratic lawmakers filed a separate amicus brief defending the agency.
New York Attorney General Letitia James speaks at a news conference in New York, Sept. 8, 2022.
Caitlin Ochs | Reuters

WASHINGTON — New York Attorney General Letitia James is leading a multistate effort to urge the Supreme Court to overturn a decision that threatens the existence of the nation's leading consumer protection agency.

Attorneys general in 22 other states and the District of Columbia joined New York in an amicus brief filing to the court Tuesday in support of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The brief comes a day after dozens of current and former Democratic lawmakers filed a separate amicus brief defending the agency.

"The CFPB has proven that it is able to stand up for consumers and help states, including New York, to ensure that our residents are protected," James said in a statement. "That is why opponents are attacking the agency, and that is why I am proud to push back on these brazenly anti-consumer protection efforts. I will continue to work with my fellow attorneys general to defend the CFPB and ensure it is able to work with our respective states to help protect consumers throughout the country."

The Supreme Court agreed in February to hear arguments after the Biden administration appealed the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision that the CFPB's funding method is unconstitutional. The justices might not issue a final ruling until 2024.

The CFPB was created under the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act after the 2008 financial crisis. Congress chose to fund the agency from the Federal Reserve and allow the CFPB to avoid the annual appropriations process to spare it from unpredictable funding cycles.

Republican lawmakers have routinely criticized the CFPB for continuing to operate outside of appropriations, but Democrats argue that the agency has congressional oversight and must justify its budget to the House on a biannual basis.

If the Supreme Court decides not to overturn the 5th Circuit's ruling, it could invalidate "numerous CFPB rules and other regulatory actions" and harm millions of Americans while destabilizing the consumer financial sector, the attorneys general said in a statement.

The attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin signed on to the amicus brief alongside New York and the District of Columbia.