Corporate Accountability

PHH Says U.S. Hasn’t Made Case for Rehearing by Full D.C. Circuit

By Chris Bruce

PHH Corp. said a federal appeals court in Washington shouldn’t rehear an October ruling that said the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s leadership framework violates the Constitution (PHH Corp. v. Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau , D.C. Cir., No. 15-cv-01177, supplemental response 1/27/17 ).

The Jan. 27 filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the government hasn’t made its case for a review by the D.C. Circuit’s full complement of judges.

The October ruling by two judges on a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel said the CFPB’s structure violates the separation of powers, and a recent filing by the government urged the full D.C. Circuit to review that decision.

But the government’s filing doesn’t really confront the panel’s holding, PHH’s lawyers told the court. “The panel applied the governing standard and reached the unavoidable conclusion that the CFPB’s structure violates the Constitution’s separation of powers,” they said. “Although the United States would have preferred that the panel take a (supposedly) different path in reaching that conclusion, it never challenges the panel’s ultimate result.”

The filing came one day after Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) moved to intervene in the PHH case. They said the new administration will try to remove Cordray, or that it will make no effort to defend the CFPB’s status as an independent agency as established by the Dodd-Frank Act.

“Movants now seek to intervene in this litigation because recent events have made it clear that their interests in preserving the leadership structure they voted for may no longer be adequately represented by the new Administration,” Brown and Waters said in their motion.

The lawmakers are represented by Elizabeth B. Wydra, Brianne J. Gorod, Brian R. Frazelle, and Simon Lazarus of the Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington.

PHH is represented by Theodore B. Olson and Helgi C. Walker of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, Mitchel H. Kider, David M. Souders, Sandra B. Vipond, and Michael S. Trabon of Weiner Brodsky Kider in Washington, and Thomas M. Hefferon and William M. Jay of Goodwin Procter in Washington.

More from Corporate Accountability

Corporate Accountability
July 27, 2026

CAC Release: Corporations Fare Even Better Than President Trump in the Supreme Court, Constitutional Accountability Center Finds

WASHINGTON, DC – The Supreme Court has just released its final decisions in cases argued...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

AbbVie v. Department of Health and Human Services

In AbbVie v. Department of Health and Human Services, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is considering whether the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug price negotiation program is an unconstitutional taking...
Corporate Accountability
June 5, 2026

US Supreme Court backs federal regulators in wins for FCC and SEC

Reuters
CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod was quoted in Reuters discussing recent Supreme Court wins for...
Corporate Accountability
June 4, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Recognizes the Importance of History in Validating FCC Enforcement Process

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Federal Communications Commission v....
By: Smita Ghosh, Joshua Blecher-Cohen
Corporate Accountability
April 24, 2026

How the Supreme Court will have a major impact on the economy this spring

CNN
CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod spoke to CNN about big business at the Supreme Court. Read...
Corporate Accountability
July 27, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Considers Constitutionality of FCC Enforcement Process

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Federal Communications...
By: Joshua Blecher-Cohen, Smita Ghosh