Corporate Accountability

RELEASE: Gutting CFPB Independence Would Be At Odds with Congress’s Plan

“So long as the relevant removal restriction allows the President to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, the question whether the agency should be headed by a single director or more than one is a policy judgment. And the Constitution assigns that judgment to Congress, not the courts.” — CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod

WASHINGTON – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Constitutional Accountability Center Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod, present for today’s proceedings, issued the following reaction:

The Constitution gives Congress broad discretion to determine how best to structure federal agencies, and Congress has chosen to give the CFPB and some other agency heads some degree of independence from the president by providing that they can only be removed for cause. If the Court were to gut that removal restriction in the name of upholding it, it would, as the attorney defending the CFPB, Paul Clement, noted, be at odds with Congress’s plan in including that restriction in Dodd-Frank. It would also, as Justice Gorsuch recognized, be tantamount to overruling decades of Supreme Court precedent upholding identical removal restrictions.

The Supreme Court has long upheld these removal restrictions because they don’t interfere with the President’s ability to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. That is no less true of that restriction as it applies to the CFPB. To be sure, as Chief Justice Roberts noted, the Bureau has budgetary independence, but so do most independent financial regulators. And to be sure it is headed by a single director, not a multimember commission. But if anything that makes the CFPB more accountable to the President, not less. The Chief Justice noted that most independent agencies have been headed by a multimember commission, but so long as the relevant removal restriction allows the President to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, the question whether the agency should be headed by a single director or more than one is a policy judgment. And the Constitution assigns that judgment to Congress, not the courts.

#

Resources:

CAC case page in Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/

CAC White Paper: “Constitutional and Accountable: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,” by Brianne Gorod, Brian Frazelle, Simon Lazarus, October 20, 2016: https://www.theusconstitution.org/think_tank/constitutional-and-accountable-the-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Corporate Accountability

Corporate Accountability
September 9, 2025

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS—Fifth Circuit rejects petition challenging OCC authority to enforce national banking rules

Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw
The court distinguished the national banking regulatory regime from the SEC’s antifraud provision in Jarkesy and the...
Corporate Accountability
July 11, 2025

This Group’s Record in Front of the Roberts Court Is Mind-Boggling

Slate
In a provocative dissenting opinion, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recently called out her colleagues on the Supreme Court...
By: Ana Builes, Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
July 2, 2025

Moneyed Interests Still Prevail at the Supreme Court (2024-2025 Term)

The Court Continues to Favor Corporations over Workers, Consumers, and the Environment.
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Ana Builes
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Novartis v. Secretary United States Department of Health and Human Services

In Novartis v. Secretary United States Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit considered whether the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug price negotiation program is an unconstitutional...
Corporate Accountability
January 28, 2025

Federal Deposit Insurance as Jarkesy Waiver

Yale Journal on Regulation
An argument lurking just beneath the surface in a pending Fifth Circuit case could stem...
Corporate Accountability
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Boehringer Ingelheim v. Department of Health and Human Services

In Boehringer Ingelheim v. Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit considered whether the Inflation Reduction Act’s Medicare drug price negotiation program is an unconstitutional taking...