Supreme Court: States Won’t Have Time to Argue in CFPB Funding Case

Learn why a group of Republican state attorneys general requested to present at the Supreme Court case on the funding of the CFPB.

David Baumann


Aug 23



View all posts by 

David Baumann

Articles Posted by

David Baumann

A squiggly pink arrow pointing downward and to the right.

Request cites “special expertise” in consumer protection.

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied a request from a group of Republican state attorneys general who wanted the opportunity to discuss the constitutionality of the CFPB when the court holds arguments on the issue on Oct. 3.

The court issued its ruling without comment.


The attorneys general had requested ten of the 30 minutes reserved for the Community Financial Services Association of America. The CFSA filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the CFPB, arguing that its funding scheme was unconstitutional because the agency is not funded through the annual congressional appropriations process.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the CFSA, voided the CFPB’s payday lending rule, and called into question all agency actions since it was created in the Dodd-Frank Act.

Behind the Request

The state attorneys general had said they had “special expertise” in consumer protection and given that knowledge, “have a special understanding of how an unbounded CFPB can damage the consumer-financial markets—and impair the States’ own abilities to regulate those markets.”

And they added, “An unbounded CFPB ultimately strikes at the States’ powers over the financial markets.”


No items found.