View source for Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

{{Organization
|OrganizationName=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
|OrganizationType=Independent Agencies
|Mission=The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau works to make consumer financial markets work for consumers, responsible providers, and the economy as a whole. It aims to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive practices and ensure they receive the information needed to make smart financial decisions.
|CreationLegislation=Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
|Employees=1600
|Budget=$645 million (fiscal year 2024)
|OrganizationExecutive=Director
|Services=Consumer complaints; Rulemaking; Supervision; Enforcement; Financial education
|Regulations=Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B); Truth in Lending Act (Regulation Z); Fair Credit Reporting Act (Regulation V)
|HeadquartersLocation=38.89824, -77.03963
|HeadquartersAddress=1700 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20552
|Website=https://www.consumerfinance.gov
}}
{{Short description|United States government agency}}

{{Infobox government agency
| agency_name     = Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
| nativename      = 
| seal            = CFPB seal.png
| seal_width      = 
| seal_caption    = 
| logo            = CFPB logo.svg
| formed          = {{Start date and age|2011|07|21}}.
| jurisdiction    = United States
| headquarters    = [[Washington, D.C.]], U.S.
| employees       = 1,591 (2021)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_financial-report_fy2021.pdf|publisher=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|title=Financial report of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Fiscal year 2021|access-date=November 30, 2021}}</ref>
| budget          = [[United States dollar|US$]]596 million (FY 2021)
| chief1_name     = [[Rohit Chopra]]
| chief1_position = Director
| parent_agency   = [[Federal Reserve]]
| keydocument1    = [[Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act]]
| website         = {{official URL}}
| coordinates     = {{coord|38.898091|-77.040591|display=inline,title}}
| footnotes       = 
| chief3_name     = 
| chief3_position = 
| chief4_name     = 
| chief4_position = 
| chief5_name     = 
| chief5_position = 
| chief6_name     = 
| chief6_position = 
| chief7_name     = 
| chief7_position = 
| chief8_name     = 
| chief8_position = 
| chief9_name     = 
| chief9_position = 
| parent_department = 
}}
The '''Consumer Financial Protection Bureau''' ('''CFPB''') is an [[independent agency of the United States government]] responsible for [[consumer protection]] in the [[financial sector]]. CFPB's jurisdiction includes [[bank]]s, [[credit union]]s, securities firms, [[Payday loans in the United States|payday lenders]], mortgage-servicing operations, [[foreclosure]] relief services, [[debt collector]]s, for-profit colleges, and other financial companies operating in the United States. Since its founding, the CFPB has used technology tools to monitor how financial entities used social media and algorithms to target consumers.<ref name="Van Loo 531">{{Cite journal |last=Van Loo |first=Rory |date=2018-07-01 |title=Technology Regulation by Default: Platforms, Privacy, and the CFPB |url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/355 |journal=Georgetown Law Technology Review |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=531–532, 537}}</ref>

The CFPB's creation was authorized by the [[Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act]], whose passage in 2010 was a legislative response to the [[financial crisis of 2007–08]] and the subsequent [[Great Recession]]<ref name="WSOFP">{{cite web |author=Eaglesham, Jean |date=February 9, 2011 |title=Warning Shot On Financial Protection |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703507804576130370862263258?mod=googlenews_wsj |access-date=February 10, 2011 |work=The Wall Street Journal}}{{subscription required}}</ref> and is an independent bureau within the [[Federal Reserve]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau |url=https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/consumer-financial-protection-bureau |access-date=2023-02-28 |website=Federal Register}}</ref> The CFPB's status as an independent agency has been subject to many challenges in court. In June 2020, the [[United States Supreme Court]] ruled that the president [[Unitary executive theory|can remove]] the director without cause but allowed the agency to remain in operation. The Bureau is one of the agencies that [[Project 2025]] advocates that Congress should cut.<ref>{{Cite news |date=July 31, 2024 |title=Is this the end of Project 2025, the plan that riled Donald Trump? |url=https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/07/31/is-this-the-end-of-project-2025-the-plan-that-riled-donald-trump |access-date=2024-08-04 |newspaper=The Economist |issn=0013-0613}}</ref>

==Role==
According to former Director [[Richard Cordray]], the Bureau's priorities are mortgages, credit cards and [[student loans]].<ref name=WSOFP/><ref name=NUcfbhwp/> The CFPB qualifies as a large independent agency that was designed to consolidate its employees and responsibilities from a number of other federal regulatory bodies, including the [[Federal Reserve]], the [[Federal Trade Commission]], the [[Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation]], the [[National Credit Union Administration]] and even the [[Department of Housing and Urban Development]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Van Loo|first=Rory|date=2018-08-01|title=Regulatory Monitors: Policing Firms in the Compliance Era|url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/265|journal=Faculty Scholarship|volume=119 |issue=2 |page=369 }}</ref> The bureau is an independent unit located inside and funded by the [[United States Federal Reserve]], with interim affiliation with the [[U.S. Treasury Department]].{{citation needed|date=November 2017}}

The CFPB writes and enforces rules for financial institutions, examines both bank and [[non-bank financial institution]]s, monitors and reports on markets, as well as collects and tracks consumer complaints.<ref name=NUcfbhwp>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/09/14/factbox-new-us-consumer-financial-bureau-has-wide-powers/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100919154911/http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2010/09/14/factbox-new-us-consumer-financial-bureau-has-wide-powers/|url-status=dead|archive-date=September 19, 2010|title=FACTBOX-New US consumer financial bureau has wide powers|access-date=February 10, 2011|date=September 14, 2010|publisher=Reuters|author=Warren, Elizabeth}}</ref>

The CFPB opened its website in early February 2011 to accept suggestions from consumers via [[YouTube]], [[Twitter]], and its own website interface. According to the [[United States Treasury Department]], the bureau is tasked with the responsibility to "promote fairness and transparency for [[mortgage loan|mortgages]], [[credit card]]s, and other consumer [[financial product]]s and services".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2011/02/07/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-website-launched-open-suggestions/|title=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Website Launched and Open for Suggestions|access-date=February 10, 2011|date=February 7, 2011|publisher=mybanktracker.com|archive-date=February 10, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110210123912/http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2011/02/07/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-website-launched-open-suggestions/|url-status=dead}}</ref> According to its web site, the CFPB's "central mission...is to make markets for consumer financial products and services work for Americans—whether they are applying for a mortgage, choosing among credit cards, or using any number of other consumer financial products".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.consumerfinance.gov/the-bureau/|title=Learn About the Bureau|access-date=February 10, 2011|publisher=United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}}</ref> In 2016 alone most of the hundreds and thousands of consumer complaints about their financial services—including banks and credit card issuers—were received and compiled by CFPB and are publicly available on a federal government database.<ref name="AP_T100_CFPB_closure">{{cite news |url=https://apnews.com/d3b492915ca7457ca643ecd9a0d954f5/Public-window-on-financial-complaints-could-be-closing-soon? |work=Associated Press |title=Public window on financial complaints could be closing soon |author=Kevin Freking |location=Washington |date=April 23, 2017 |access-date=April 23, 2017}}</ref>

Once a [[financial institution]] acquires $10{{nbsp}}[[billion]] in [[assets]], it falls under the guidance, rules, and [[regulations]] under the CFPB. The bank will then be known as a CFPB regulated bank. The CFPB will examine the institution for compliance with bank regulatory laws.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://independentbanker.org/2017/02/what-happens-when-a-bank-hits-10-billion/ | title= What happens when a bank hits $10 billion? | publisher=[[Independent Community Bankers of America]]}}</ref>

The regulations implemented by the Bureau are housed in Chapter X of Title XII Banks and Banking of the U.S. [[Code of Federal Regulations]]. Some notable examples include the ECOA ([[Equal Credit Opportunity Act]] - Regulation B), HMDA ([[Home Mortgage Disclosure Act]] - Regulation C), [[Alternative Mortgage Transaction Parity Act of 1982]] (Regulation D), EFTA ([[Electronic Fund Transfer Act]] - Regulation E), FDCPA ([[Fair Debt Collection Practices Act]] - Regulation F), FCRA ([[Fair Credit Reporting Act]] - Regulation V), RESPA ([[Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act]] - Regulation X), TILA ([[Truth in Lending Act]] - Regulation Z), and [[Truth in Savings Act]] (Regulation DD).<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-X/ | title= Code of Federal Regulations - eCFR | publisher=Government Website}}</ref>{{Secondary source needed|date=August 2024}}

==History==
In July 2010, Congress passed the [[Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act]], during the [[111th United States Congress]] in response to the [[late-2000s recession]] and [[Financial crisis of 2007–2008|financial crisis]].<ref name="WSOFP"/> The agency was originally proposed in 2007 by then [[Harvard Law School]] professor [[Elizabeth Warren]], who later became a US senator.<ref>Mogilnicki EJ, Malpass MS. [http://www.wilmerhale.com/uploadedFiles/WilmerHale_Shared_Content/Files/PDFs/TBL-mogilnicki-malpass-2013.pdf The First Year of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: An Overview] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131017060330/http://www.wilmerhale.com/uploadedFiles/WilmerHale_Shared_Content/Files/PDFs/TBL-mogilnicki-malpass-2013.pdf |date=October 17, 2013 }}. ''The Business Lawyer''.</ref> The proposed CFPB was actively supported by [[Americans for Financial Reform]], a newly created umbrella organization of some 250 consumer, labor, civil rights and other activist organizations.<ref>
{{cite book | last1 = Kirsch | first1 = Larry | last2 = Mayer |  first2=Robert| title = Financial justice : the people's campaign to stop lender abuse | publisher = Praeger | location = Santa Barbara | year = 2013 | isbn = 978-1440829512 }}</ref>

On September 17, 2010, President Obama announced the appointment of Warren as [[Assistant to the President]] and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to set up the new agency.<ref>[https://money.cnn.com/2010/09/17/news/economy/Elizabeth_Warren_consumer_bureau/ Obama names Warren as special adviser]. ''CNN Money''.</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=President Obama Names Elizabeth Warren Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/17/president-obama-names-elizabeth-warren-assistant-president-and-special-a|via=[[NARA|National Archives]]|work=[[whitehouse.gov]]|date=September 17, 2010 |access-date=December 17, 2014}}</ref> Due to the way the legislation creating the bureau was written, until the first director was in place, the agency was not able to write new rules or supervise financial institutions other than banks.{{Citation needed|date=August 2024}}

[[File:Nomination of Richard Cordray.jpg|thumb|President [[Barack Obama]] announces the nomination of [[Richard Cordray]] as the first director of the CFPB on July 18, 2011.]]
Elizabeth Warren, who proposed and established the CFPB, was removed from consideration as the bureau's first formal director after Obama administration officials became convinced Warren could not overcome strong [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] opposition.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2011-sep-07-la-fi-consumer-bureau-cordray-20110907-story.html|title=GOP stalls confirmation of consumer agency nominee|date=September 7, 2011|author=Puzzanghera, Jim|work=[[Los Angeles Times]]}}</ref> On July 17, President Obama nominated former [[Ohio Attorney General]] and [[Ohio State Treasurer]] [[Richard Cordray]] to be the first formal director of the CFPB.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/business/former-ohio-attorney-general-picked-to-lead-consumer-agency.html|title=Former Ohio Attorney General Picked to Lead Consumer Agency|access-date=July 17, 2011|date=July 17, 2011|work=The New York Times|author=Appelbaum, Binyamin}}</ref> Prior to his nomination, Cordray had been hired as chief of enforcement for the agency.<ref>Bennett D, Dougherty C. (2011). [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-07/elizabeth-warren-s-dream-becomes-a-consumer-bureau-she-may-never-lead.html Elizabeth Warren's Dream Becomes a Real Agency She May Never Get to Lead]. ''Bloomberg''.</ref>

However, Cordray's nomination was immediately in jeopardy due to 44 [[United States Senate|Senate]] Republicans vowing to derail any nominee in order to encourage a decentralized structure of the organization. Senate Republicans had also shown a pattern of refusing to consider regulatory agency nominees.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/business/dodd-frank-under-fire-a-year-later.html|title=Dodd–Frank Under Fire a Year Later|access-date=July 22, 2011|date=July 18, 2011|work=The New York Times|author=Wyatt, Edward}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Epstein, Reid J. |date=July 21, 2011 |title=Richard Shelby: Richard Cordray is DOA |url=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59545.html |access-date=July 22, 2011 |work=[[Politico (newspaper)|Politico]]}}</ref>
The CFPB formally began operation on July 21, 2011.<ref name=CordrayPicked>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/18/business/former-ohio-attorney-general-picked-to-lead-consumer-agency.html?_r=0&pagewanted=all|title=Former Ohio Attorney General Picked to Lead Consumer Agency|access-date=July 17, 2011|date=July 17, 2011|work=The New York Times|author=Appelbaum, Binyamin}}</ref>

Since the CFPB database was established in 2011, more than four million complaints have been published.<ref>{{cite web |title=Four million complaints: More than just a milestone |date=September 29, 2023 |url=https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/four-million-complaints-more-than-just-a-milestone/}}</ref> CFPB supporters include the [[Consumers Union]] claim that it is a "vital tool that can help consumers make informed decisions".<ref name="AP_T100_CFPB_closure" /> CFPB detractors argue that the CFPB database is a "gotcha game" and that there is already a database maintained by the [[Federal Trade Commission]] although that information is not available to the public.<ref name="AP_T100_CFPB_closure" />

On January 4, 2012, [[Barack Obama]] issued a [[recess appointment]] to install Cordray as director through the end of 2013. This was a highly controversial move as the Senate was still holding ''[[pro forma]]'' sessions, and the possibility existed that the appointment could be challenged in court.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/44/post/obama-to-use-executive-power-to-name-consumer-watchdog-chief-over-gop-objections/2012/01/04/gIQAVtFXaP_blog.html?hpid=z2|title=Obama to use executive power to name consumer watchdog chief over GOP objections |access-date=January 4, 2012|date=January 4, 2012|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|author1=Nakamura, David  |author2=Sonmez, Felicia}}</ref> This type of recess appointment was unanimously ruled unconstitutional in ''[[NLRB v. Noel Canning]]''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vox.com/2014/6/26/5843366/recess-appointments-supreme-court|title=SCOTUS rules against Obama on recess appointments|first=Andrew|last=Prokop|date=June 26, 2014|website=Vox}}</ref>

On July 16, 2013, the Senate confirmed Cordray as director in a 66–34 vote.<ref name=CTSCC>{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/07/16/202644353/cooling-tensions-senate-votes-to-advance-cordray-nomination|title=Cooling Tensions, Senate Confirms Cordray|access-date=July 19, 2013|date=July 16, 2013|publisher=[[NPR]]|author=Peralta, Eyder}}</ref> Cordray resigned in late 2017 to run for governor of Ohio.

The [[Financial CHOICE Act]], proposed by the House Financial Services Committee's [[Jeb Hensarling]], to repeal the [[Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act]], passed the House on June 8, 2017. Also in June 2017, the Senate was crafting its own reform bill.<ref name="CNN_financial_choice_2017">{{cite news |title=House votes to kill Dodd-Frank. Now what? |first=Donna |last=Borak |quote=..."advanced the 'crown jewel' of the GOP-led regulatory reform effort, effectively gutting the Dodd-Frank financial regulations that were put in place during the Obama administration." |date=June 8, 2017 |access-date=June 9, 2017 |url=https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/08/news/economy/house-dodd-frank-repeal/index.html}}</ref><ref name="businessinsider_CHOICE_2017">{{cite news |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/house-vote-on-financial-choice-act-wall-street-dodd-frank-regulation-2017-6 |work=[[Business Insider]] |title=The House quietly voted to destroy post-financial-crisis Wall Street regulations |date=June 9, 2017 |access-date=June 9, 2017 |first=Bob |last=Bryan}}</ref>

Testimony in US Congressional hearings of 2017 have elicited concerns that the wholesale publication of consumer complaints is both misleading and injurious to the consumer market. Rep. [[Barry Loudermilk]] (R-GA) said at one such congressional hearing, "Is the purpose of the database just to name and shame companies? Or should they have a disclaimer on there that says it's a fact-free zone, or this is fake news? That's really what I see happening here." Bill Himpler, executive vice president of the [[American Financial Services Association]], a trade group representing banks and other lenders responded "Something needs to be done." "Once the damage is done to a company, it's hard to get your reputation back.<ref name="AP_T100_CFPB_closure" />

[[Mick Mulvaney]], as acting director of the CFPB, removed all 25 members of the agency's Consumer Advisory Board on June 5, 2018, after eleven of them held a press conference on June 3 in which they criticized him.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Merle |first1=Renae |title=Mick Mulvaney fires all 25 members of consumer watchdog's advisory board |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/06/06/mick-mulvaney-fires-members-of-cfpb-advisory-board/ |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=June 11, 2019 |date=June 6, 2018}}</ref>

On February 13, 2021, President [[Joe Biden]] formally submitted to the Senate the nomination of [[Rohit Chopra]] to serve as director of the CFPB.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.congress.gov/nomination/117th-congress/116 |title=PN116 — Rohit Chopra — Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection |website=U.S. Congress |access-date=February 14, 2021}}</ref> His nomination was approved on September 30, 2021, by a 50-48 vote.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Gregg|first=Aaron|date=September 30, 2021|title=Senate confirms Rohit Chopra to lead Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/09/30/rohit-chopra-cfpb/|access-date=September 30, 2021}}</ref>

In June 2024, the CFPB proposed banning using medical debt in credit reports or loan decisions.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Diamond |first1=Dan |last2=Gregg |first2=Aaron |date=2024-06-12 |title=Biden proposes to ban medical debt from credit reports, loan decisions |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2024/06/11/biden-cfpb-medical-debt/ |access-date=2024-08-04 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref>

In July 2024, the CFPB gave [[Zelle]] a choice between a settlement or litigation around its handling of fraud and scams on its platform.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Anand |first=Nupur |date=August 2, 2024 |title=JPMorgan considers suing consumer watchdog over Zelle |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/jpmorgan-considers-suing-consumer-watchdog-over-zelle-2024-08-02/ |work=Reuters}}</ref>

== Regulatory activities ==
[[File:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (53844898134).jpg|thumb|HQ Entrance (2024)]]
From its creation until 2017, the CFPB "has curtailed abusive debt collection practices, reformed mortgage lending, publicized and investigated hundreds of thousands of complaints from aggrieved customers of financial institutions, and extracted nearly $12 billion for 29 million consumers in refunds and canceled debts."<ref>Steve Eder, Jessica Silver-Greenberg & Stacy Cowley, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/business/consumer-financial-protection-bureau.html Republicans Want to Sideline This Regulator. But It May Be Too Popular], ''The New York Times'' (August 31, 2017).</ref> That figure had risen to $19 billion by 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sherman |first=Mark |date=2024-05-16 |title=Supreme Court sides with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, spurning a conservative attack |url=https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-cfpb-consumer-protection-9f30de9bbfa5b25a47804b101fb998e8 |access-date=2024-08-04 |website=AP News |language=en}}</ref>

===Public outreach===
The CFPB has created a number of [[personal finance]] tools for consumers, including Ask CFPB, which compiles plain-language answers to personal finance questions, and Paying for College, which estimates the cost of attending specific universities based on the [[Student financial aid (United States)|financial aid]] offers a student has received.<ref>{{cite news|author=Maya Jackson Randall|date=March 22, 2012|title=Consumer-protection agency launches 'Ask CFPB' tool|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2012/03/22/consumer-protection-agency-launches-ask-cfpb-tool/|access-date=August 7, 2013}}</ref><ref>Liberto, Jennifer (April 11, 2012). "[https://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/pf/college/consumer_bureau_student_loans/index.htm Compare College Costs with Online Tool]". CNNMoney. Retrieved August 8, 2013.</ref>

In 2014, the CFPB attempted to help consumers understand the risks of [[Cryptocurrency|cryptocurrencies]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2014-08-12 |title=Consumer protection agency urges Americans to beware of Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/consumer-protection-agency-urges-americans-beware-bitcoin-cryptocurrencies |access-date=2024-08-14 |website=PBS News |language=en-us}}</ref>

===Consumer data protection===
In 2016, the CFPB took its first enforcement action against a company that the CFPB alleged had failed to properly protect the privacy and security of consumers data.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Dwolla Fined $100,000 by CFPB in First Data Security Enforcement Action|url=https://www.natlawreview.com/article/dwolla-fined-100000-cfpb-first-data-security-enforcement-action|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160309110145/http://www.natlawreview.com/article/dwolla-fined-100000-cfpb-first-data-security-enforcement-action |archive-date=March 9, 2016 }}</ref>

=== Credit card fees ===
In 2024, the Bureau limited credit card late fees to $8.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |last=Raymond |first=Nate |date=July 9, 2024 |title=CFPB says US Supreme Court rulings justify reviving credit card fees rule |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/cfpb-says-us-supreme-court-rulings-justify-reviving-credit-card-fees-rule-2024-07-09/ |work=Reuters}}</ref> The rule was blocked by a judge, but the reason given for the block was overturned by the Supreme Court giving the Bureau confidence that the rule will be implemented.<ref name=":0" />

=== Controversies ===
A 2013 press release from the [[United States House Committee on Financial Services|United States House Financial Services Committee]] criticized the CFPB for what was described as a "radical structure" that "is controlled by a single individual who cannot be fired for poor performance and who exercises sole control over the agency, its hiring and its budget." Moreover, the committee alleged a lack of financial transparency and a lack of accountability to Congress or the President. Committee Vice Chairman [[Patrick McHenry]], expressed particular concern about travel costs and a $55 million renovation of CFPB headquarters, stating "$55 million is more than the entire annual construction and acquisition budget for [[General Services Administration|GSA]] for the totality of federal buildings."<ref>{{cite web|author1=Jeb Hensarling|author1-link=Jeb Hensarling|date=June 18, 2013|title=CFPB Lacks Oversight and Accountability|url=http://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=339512|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170516101416/http://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=339512|archive-date=May 16, 2017|access-date=May 18, 2017|publisher=[[United States House Committee on Financial Services|U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee]]|language=en|format=Press release}}</ref>

In 2014, some employees and former employees of the CFPB testified before Congress about an alleged culture of racism and sexism at the agency. Former employees testified they were retaliated against for bringing problems to the attention of superiors.<ref>{{cite web|last=Devaney|first=Tim|date=June 18, 2014|title=Ex-staffer: CFPB run like a 'plantation'|url=https://thehill.com/regulation/209869-ex-cfpb-employee-compares-it-to-working-at-a-plantation/|website=The Hill}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Lee |first1=M. J. |title=Worker alleges CFPB 'trail of victims' |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/cfpb-workplace-discrimination-105310 |website=POLITICO |language=en |date=2 April 2014}}</ref>

House Republicans criticized the methodology the CFPB uses to identify instances of racial discrimination among auto lenders. Because of legal constraints, the agency used a system to "guess" the race of auto loan applicants based on their last name and listed address. Based on that information, the agency charged several lenders were discriminating against minority applicants and levied large fines and settlements against those companies. [[Ally Financial]] paid $98 million in fines and settlement fees in 2013.<ref name=":1">{{Cite news |last=Moyer |first=Liz |date=2015-11-25 |title=Consumer Bureau Faulted on Auto Lending Inquiry |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/26/business/dealbook/house-report-increases-pressure-on-cfpb.html |access-date=2024-08-14 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> As the agency's methodology means it can only guess who may be victims of discrimination entitled to settlement funds, as of late 2015, the CFPB had yet to compensate any individuals who were victims of Ally's allegedly discriminatory practices.<ref name=":1" /> In 2016, the House voted to overturn its 2013 guidance, with 88 Democrats joining House Republicans.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Finkle |first=Victoria |date=2016-03-16 |title=House Republicans Clash With Consumer Protection Unit Chief |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/business/dealbook/house-republicans-clash-with-consumer-protection-unit-chief.html |access-date=2024-08-14 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

Cordray was accused but cleared of any violations of the [[Hatch Act of 1939|Hatch Act]] as Director of the CFPB after being investigated by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC).<ref>{{cite news |last1=Manchester |first1=Julia |title=Consumer chief didn't violate ethics rules, agency says |url=https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/358733-consumer-chief-didnt-violate-ethics-rules-agency-says/ |access-date=15 November 2023 |work=The Hill |date=3 November 2017}}</ref>{{Relevance inline|date=August 2024}}

==Amendment==
On May 21, 2018, US President Donald Trump signed into law Congressional legislation repealing the enforcement of automobiles lending rules.<ref>{{cite web|author=Warmbrodt, Zachary|date=May 21, 2018|title=Trump signs bill blocking consumer bureau auto-lending measure|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/21/trump-signs-bill-blocking-cfpb-auto-lending-measure-558281|access-date=May 25, 2018|work=[[Politico]]}}</ref>  On May 24, 2018, Trump signed into law the [[Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act]], exempting dozens of banks from the CFPB's regulations.<ref>{{cite web|author=Sherman, Erik|date=May 24, 2018|title=Scaling back Dodd-Frank is just the beginning of Trump's run on deregulation|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/scaling-back-dodd-frank-just-beginning-trump-s-run-deregulation-n877031|access-date=May 25, 2018|work=[[NBC News]]}}</ref>

===Proposed amendment===
On September 26, 2013, the [[Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2013 (H.R. 3193; 113th Congress)]] was introduced into the United States House of Representatives.<ref name=hr3193>{{cite web|title=H.R. 3193 – Summary|url=http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/3193|publisher=United States Congress|access-date=February 11, 2014}}</ref> The bill would have created a five-person commission and removed it from the Federal Reserve System.<ref name=Peteanotherswing>{{cite news|last=Kasperowicz|first=Pete|title=House to take another swing at Dodd–Frank reform|url=https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/economics-trade/197799-house-will-take-another-swing-at-dodd-frank-reform/|access-date=February 11, 2014|newspaper=The Hill|date=February 7, 2014}}</ref> The CFPB would have been renamed the "Financial Product Safety Commission". The bill was also intended to make it easier to override the CFPB decisions. It passed in the House of Representatives on February 27, 2014 and was received by the Senate on March 4.<ref>{{cite web|title=H.R. 3193 – Consumer Financial Freedom and Washington Accountability Act|url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/3193|website=congress.gov|access-date=October 17, 2015}}</ref> It was never considered in the Democratic controlled Senate.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Lunsford|first1=Patrick|title=CFPB Reform Bill Introduced in House Designed to Pass Congress|url=http://www.insidearm.com/daily/collection-laws-regulations/collection-laws-and-regulations/cfpb-reform-bill-introduced-in-house-designed-to-pass-congress/|website=insidearm.com|access-date=October 17, 2015|date=March 5, 2015}}</ref>

==Legal challenges==
{{Further|Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act#Constitutional challenge to Dodd–Frank}}
Two lawsuits were filed in the early years of the CFPB; they were both dismissed by federal courts, but one was appealed and is still ongoing.
The first one, filed on June 21, 2012, by a Texas bank along with the [[Competitive Enterprise Institute]], challenged the constitutionality of provisions of the CFPB.<ref name="CEILawsuit">{{cite web|last=Hall|first=Christine|title=Dodd–Frank Unconstitutional Power-Grab, Says New Lawsuit|url=http://cei.org/news-releases/dodd-frank-unconstitutional-power-grab-says-new-lawsuit|work=[[Competitive Enterprise Institute]]|date=June 21, 2012 |publisher=Competitive Enterprise Institute}}</ref> One year later, in August 2013, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit because the plaintiffs had failed to show that they had suffered harm.<ref>{{cite press release|date=August 2, 2013|title=Standing Alone, But Firm; Morgan Drexen Presses Forth in Lawsuit Against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2013/08/03/564367/10043262/en/Standing-Alone-But-Firm-Morgan-Drexen-Presses-Forth-in-Lawsuit-Against-the-Consumer-Financial-Protection-Bureau.html|access-date=May 18, 2014|publisher=[[GlobeNewswire]]}}</ref><!--<ref>{{cite web|url=http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2013/08/judge-dismisses-constitutional-challenge-to-cfpb.html|title=Judge Dismisses Constitutional Challenge to CFPB}}</ref>-->
In July 2015, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit]] affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that the bank, but not the states that later joined the lawsuit, had standing to challenge the law, and returned the case for further proceedings.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Adler|first1=Jonathan H.|date=July 24, 2015|title=D.C. Circuit revives constitutional challenge to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/24/d-c-circuit-revives-constitutional-challenge-to-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|access-date=August 10, 2015}}</ref><ref>[http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/961BA5A070E7A5CF85257E8C0050F258/$file/13-5247.pdf ''State National Bank of Big Spring, et al. v. Lew''], no. 13-5247 (D.C. Cir, July 24, 2015).</ref>

A lawsuit filed July 22, 2013, by Morgan Drexen Integrated Systems, a provider of outsourced administrative support services to attorneys, and Connecticut attorney Kimberly A. Pisinski, challenged the constitutionality of the CFPB.<ref>{{cite web|author=Pollock, Richard|date=July 23, 2013|title=Private firm sues CFPB, challenges board's constitutionality|url=http://washingtonexaminer.com/private-firm-sues-cfpb-challenges-boards-constitutionality/article/2533354|access-date=August 11, 2013|work=[[Washington Examiner]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Karmasek, Jessica M.|date=August 10, 2013|title=Conn. attorney, support services provider sue CFPB over alleged 'data mining'|url=http://legalnewsline.com/news/federal-government/243066-conn-attorney-support-services-provider-sue-cfpb-over-alleged-data-mining|access-date=August 11, 2013|work=Legal Newsline}}</ref> The complaint, filed in the U.S. [[District Court for the District of Columbia]], alleged that the "CFPB's structure insulates it from political accountability and internal checks and balances in violation of the United States Constitution. Unbridled from constitutionally-required accountability, CFPB has engaged in [[ultra vires]] and abusive practices, including attempts to regulate the practice of law (a function reserved for state bars), attempts to collect attorney-client protected material, and overreaching demands for, and mining of, personal financial information of American citizens, which has prompted a Government Accountability Office ("GAO") investigation, commenced on July 12, 2013."<ref>{{cite web|title=Morgan Drexen Filings|url=http://morgandrexenvscfpb.com/filings/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130830042857/http://morgandrexenvscfpb.com/filings/|archive-date=August 30, 2013|access-date=August 11, 2013|publisher=Morgan Drexen}}</ref>
On August 22, 2013, one month after Morgan Drexen's lawsuit, the CFPB filed its own lawsuit against Morgan Drexen in the [[United States District Court for the Central District of California]] alleging that Morgan Drexen charged advance fees for debt relief services in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule and engaged in deceptive acts and practices in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).<ref>{{cite web|last=Kaplinsky|first=Alan|date=August 23, 2013|title=A tale of two lawsuits: CFPB sues Morgan Drexen|url=http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/a-tale-of-two-lawsuits-cfpb-sues-morgan-62630/|access-date=November 8, 2013|website=JD Supra Law News}}</ref> The CFPB won this lawsuit and Morgan Drexen was ordered to pay $132,882,488 in restitution and a $40 million civil penalty.<ref>{{cite web|date=March 18, 2016|title=CFPB Wins Final Judgment Against Morgan Drexen for Illegal Debt-Relief Scheme|url=http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-wins-final-judgment-against-morgan-drexen-for-illegal-debt-relief-scheme/|access-date=June 17, 2016}}</ref>

In October 2016, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that it was unconstitutional for the CFPB director to be removable by the [[president of the United States]] only for cause, such as "inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance."<ref name="Cowly2016">{{cite news|last1=Cowley|first1=Stacy|date=October 12, 2016|title=Court Upholds Consumer Agency, Minus Its Leader's Job Security|page=B2|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/business/dealbook/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-court-ruling-unconstitutional.html?_r=1|access-date=October 18, 2016}}</ref> Circuit Judge [[Brett Kavanaugh]], joined by Senior Circuit Judge [[A. Raymond Randolph]], wrote that the law was "a threat to individual liberty" and instead found that the president could remove the CFPB director at will.<ref name=Cowly2016/>  Circuit Judge [[Karen L. Henderson]] agreed that the CFPB Director had been wrong in adopting a new interpretation of the [[Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act]], finding the [[statute of limitations]] did not apply to the CFPB, and fining the petitioning mortgage company [[PHH Corporation]] $109 million, but she dissented from giving the president a new power to remove the director, citing [[constitutional avoidance]].<ref>{{cite news|last1=Frankel|first1=Alison|date=October 11, 2016|title=The D.C. Circuit's gratuitous ruling on CFPB constitutionality|work=[[Reuters]]|url=http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2016/10/11/the-d-c-circuits-gratuitous-ruling-on-cfpb-constitutionality/|url-status=dead|access-date=October 18, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161015123334/http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2016/10/11/the-d-c-circuits-gratuitous-ruling-on-cfpb-constitutionality/|archive-date=October 15, 2016}}</ref> The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the decision and ordered ''[[en banc]]'' review.<ref>{{cite web|date=October 11, 2016|title=PHH Corporation v. CFPB, No. 15-1177 (D.C. Cir. 2017)|url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-1177/15-1177-2017-02-16.html|access-date=November 27, 2017|website=Justia}}</ref> On January 31, 2018, the ''en banc'' D.C. Circuit found that the CFPB's structure was constitutional by a vote of 7–3. Judge [[Cornelia Pillard]], writing for the majority, found that the [[Take Care Clause]] does not forbid [[independent agencies of the United States government|independent agencies]], while each of the circuit judges from the earlier panel wrote separate dissents.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Weiss|first1=Debra Cassens|date=31 January 2018|title=Full DC Circuit upholds structure of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|language=en|work=[[ABA Journal]]|url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/full_dc_circuit_upholds_structure_of_consumer_financial_protection_bureau|access-date=5 April 2018}}</ref>

In June 2018, [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York|New York Federal District Court]] judge [[Loretta Preska]] ruled against its structure.<ref name="JRABS">{{cite news|last1=Hayashi|first1=Yuka|date=22 June 2018|title=Judge Rules Against Bureau's Structure|page=A5|work=The Wall Street Journal|publisher=Dow Jones/News Corp|volume=CCLXXI|issue=145|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-based-judge-rules-cfpbs-structure-is-unconstitutional-1529616526}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Lane, Sylvan|date=June 21, 2018|title=Federal court rules consumer bureau structure unconstitutional|url=https://thehill.com/policy/finance/393510-federal-court-rules-consumer-bureau-structure-unconstitutional/|access-date=May 29, 2019|work=The Hill}}</ref>
In January 2019, the Supreme Court denied review of the DC Circuit Court decision.<ref>{{cite web|title=State National Bank of Big Spring v. Mnuchin|url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/state-national-bank-of-big-spring-v-mnuchin/|access-date=May 29, 2019|publisher=SCOTUSblog}}</ref>

In October 2019, the Supreme Court announced it would review the constitutionality of the Bureau's structure in the case ''[[Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau]]'' considering the split decision of the lower courts.<ref>{{cite web|title=Justices to review constitutionality of CFPB structure|date=October 18, 2019 |url=https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/10/justices-to-review-constitutionality-of-cfpb-structure/|access-date=November 30, 2019|publisher=SCOTUSblog}}</ref> Oral arguments began on March 3, 2020.<ref>{{cite web|author=Liptak, Adam|date=March 3, 2020|title=Supreme Court Divided on Trump's Power to Fire Head of Consumer Bureau|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/03/us/supreme-court-consumer-bureau.html|access-date=March 3, 2020|work=The New York Times}}</ref>

On June 29, 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5–4 decision that the firing protections of the director are an unconstitutional restraint on the president's ability to oversee executive branch agencies. "Such an agency lacks a foundation in historical practice and clashes with constitutional structure by concentrating power in a unilateral actor insulated from Presidential control," Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] wrote in the majority opinion, which was joined by his conservative colleagues.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Rowland|first=Geoffrey|date=2020-06-29|title=Supreme Court rules consumer bureau director can be fired at will|url=https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/505000-supreme-court-rules-consumer-bureau-director-can-be-fired-at-will/|access-date=2020-06-29|website=TheHill|language=en}}</ref> The statutes around the Director's position on the CFPB were considered [[severability|severable]] from the remaining structure of the CFPB, and the Court ordered that "The agency may therefore continue to operate, but its Director, in light of our decision, must be removable by the President at will." The dissenting opinion, written by Justice [[Elena Kagan]], stated that the majority's decision has the court "second-guessing" the two political branches of government (Congress and the president) on how to structure the executive branch and "wipes out a feature of [the CFPB] its creators thought fundamental to its mission—a measure of independence from political pressure."<ref name="cnbc decision">{{cite web|last1=Mangan|first1=Dan|last2=Higgens|first2=Tucker|date=June 29, 2020|title=Supreme Court leaves consumer regulator standing but backs president's ability to fire director|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html|access-date=June 29, 2020|work=[[CNBC]]}}</ref> 

===2017 dispute over acting director===
{{See also|English v. Trump}}

On November 24, 2017, Director Cordray appointed [[Leandra English]] to the position of deputy director, and announced that he would leave office at the close of business that day.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-efff-d90d-a37f-ffff72670000|title=Note to staff from Director Cordray|website=[[Politico]] }}</ref><ref>Tara Siegel Bernard, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/24/us/politics/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-cordray-leader-trump-mulvaney.html Dueling Appointments Lead to Clash at Consumer Protection Bureau], ''The New York Times'' (November 24, 2017).</ref> Cordray indicated that would make English the acting director after his resignation,<ref>{{cite web|title=Leandra English Named Deputy Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/leandra-english-named-deputy-director-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|publisher=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|access-date=November 25, 2017|location=Washington, D.C.|date=November 24, 2017}}</ref> citing provisions of the [[Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act]] providing that the deputy director of the CFPB becomes acting director in the "absence or unavailability" of the director.<ref name="Frankel">Alison Frankel, [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-cfpb/cfpbs-controversial-structure-looms-over-leadership-showdown-idUSKBN1DR2MZ CFPB's controversial structure looms over leadership showdown], Reuters  (November 27, 2017).</ref> Later the same day, however, President [[Donald Trump]] appointed the incumbent director of the [[Office of Management and Budget]], [[Mick Mulvaney]], as acting director, citing the authority of the [[Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998]].<ref name="Frankel" />

On November 25, the [[Office of Legal Counsel]] released an opinion, written by Assistant Attorney General [[Steven Engel]], asserting that the President has the authority under the FVRA to designate an acting CFPB Director. The OLC memo maintained that "both the Vacancies Reform Act and [§1011(b)(5) of Dodd-Frank] are available for filling on an acting basis a vacancy that results from the resignation of the CFPB's Director" but that "when the President designates an individual...outside the ordinary order of succession, the President's designation necessarily controls."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/attachments/2017/11/25/cfpb_acting_director_olc_op_0.pdf|title=Memorandum for Donald F. McGahn II, Counsel to the President}}</ref> This position was also supported by the General Counsel of the CFPB, Mary E. McLeod.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/11/26/who-is-leandra-english-the-woman-at-the-center-of-a-white-house-battle-for-control-of-the-cfpb/|title=Leandra English, the woman at the center of a White House battle for control of the CFPB, files lawsuit against Trump pick to lead watchdog agency|last=Merle|first=Renae|date=November 26, 2017|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/26/consumer-bureau-trump-english-cordray-260062|title=Consumer bureau's top lawyer sides with Trump in leadership clash|last=Woellert|first=Lorraine|date=November 26, 2017|work=Politico|access-date=November 27, 2017}}</ref>

On November 26, English (represented by former CFPB Senior Counsel [[Deepak Gupta (attorney)|Deepak Gupta]]) filed a lawsuit in the [[United States District Court for the District of Columbia]] seeking a temporary restraining order and declaratory judgment to prevent Mulvaney from becoming acting director,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/business/trump-cfpb-consumer-agency.html|title=Battle for Control of Consumer Agency Heads to Court|last=Cowley|first=Stacy|date=November 26, 2017|work=The New York Times|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref> Mulvaney was given access by unnamed individuals with the keys to the director's office on November 27 and ordered all CFPB employees to disregard any claims from English that she is the acting director.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/11/27/at-the-cfpb-two-acting-directors-show-up-to-take-command-one-brings-doughnuts-the-other-well-wishes/|title=At the CFPB, two acting directors show up to take command; one brings doughnuts, the other well-wishes|last=Merle|first=Renae|date=November 27, 2017|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=November 27, 2017|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286}}</ref> Both English and Mulvaney sent emails to the entire 1,600-person staff of the CFPB, each signing as "Acting Director" of the agency.<ref>Katie Rogers, [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/us/politics/cfpb-leandra-english-mulvaney.html Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Has 2 Bosses Claiming Control], ''The New York Times'' (November 27, 2017).</ref><ref>Patrick Rucker, Richard Cowan, [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-cfpb-memo/directors-duel-over-control-of-u-s-consumer-protection-agency-idUSKBN1DR1UD Directors duel over control of U.S. consumer protection agency], Reuters (November 27, 2017).</ref> On November 28, 2017, U.S. District Judge [[Timothy J. Kelly]], who had been appointed by President Trump just a few months earlier, denied English's motion for a [[preliminary injunction]] and allowed Mulvaney to begin serving as CFPB Acting director.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Rogers|first1=Katie|last2=Bernard|first2=Tara Siegel|title=President Wins Round in the Battle for the Consumer Bureau|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/us/politics/mick-mulvaney-leandra-english-consumer-bureau.html|access-date=4 April 2018|work=The New York Times|date=29 November 2017|page=A16}}</ref>

===2019 dispute over CFPB leadership===
{{See also|Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}}

Seila Law LLC (Seila Law), a law firm that provided debt relief services, was under investigation by the CFPB. As part of its investigation, the CFPB issued a [[civil investigative demand]] (CID) to Seila Law, which required Seila Law to produce certain documents. Seila Law declined to comply with the CID and challenged the constitutionality of the CFPB. The CFPB brought a motion to enforce the CID to the [[United States District Court for the Central District of California]], where District Judge [[Josephine Staton]] granted the motion after finding the CFPB was constitutionally structured.<ref>{{Cite court|litigants=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Seila Law LLC|court=[[United States District Court for the Central District of California]]|reporter=F__|vol=___|opinion=___|date=August 25, 2017|url=http://www.lenderlawwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2019/05/Seila-District-Court-opinion.pdf}}</ref>

Seila Law's appeal to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|Ninth Circuit]] was dismissed. The 9th Circuit panel affirmed the District Court's ruling, and agreed that the Supreme Court's prior decisions upholding for-cause removal in ''Humphrey's Executor'' and ''Morrison'' were "controlling".<ref>{{Cite court|litigants=Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Seila Law LLC|court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|9th Cir.]]|reporter=F.3d|vol=923|opinion=680|date=May 6, 2019|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3534329657244473955}}</ref> It also referred approvingly to the ''en banc'' decision of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|DC Circuit]] in ''PHH Corp. v. CFPB'' (2018), in which the Circuit found that the structure of the CFPB was constitutional.<ref>{{Cite court|litigants=PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|D.C. Cir.]]|reporter=F.3d|vol=881|opinion=75|date=January 31, 2018|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3534329657244473955}}</ref>

There was arguably a [[circuit split]] on the question presented in ''Seila Law''. While the Ninth Circuit and DC Circuit had held that the CFPB's structure is constitutional, the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit|Fifth Circuit]] in ''[[Collins v. Mnuchin]]'' (2018) held that the structure of the [[Federal Housing Finance Agency]]—another agency whose director can be removed only for cause—violated the separation of powers.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Adler|first=Jonathan H.|date=2019-10-18|title=Is the CFPB Unconstitutional? We'll Soon Find Out.|url=https://reason.com/2019/10/18/is-the-cfpb-unconstitutional-well-soon-find-out/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200621091406/https://reason.com/2019/10/18/is-the-cfpb-unconstitutional-well-soon-find-out/|archive-date=2020-06-21|access-date=2020-06-20|website=[[The Volokh Conspiracy]]}}</ref>

The Supreme Court granted ''[[certiorari]]'' in ''Seila Law'' on October 18, 2019, and heard oral argument on March 3, 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Case File: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|url=https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200616212949/https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/|archive-date=2020-06-16|access-date=2020-06-20|website=[[SCOTUSblog]]}}</ref>

The Court issued its decision on June 29, 2020. The 5–4 decision ruled that the CFPB structure, with a sole director that could only be terminated for cause, was unconstitutional as it violated the separation of powers, vacating the lower court judgement and remanding the case for review. The Court recognized that the statutes around the director of the CFPB was [[Severability|severable]] from the rest of the statute establishing the agency, and thus "The agency may therefore continue to operate, but its Director, in light of our decision, must be removable by the President at will."<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html | title = Supreme Court leaves consumer regulator standing but backs president's ability to fire director | first1 = Dan | last1 = Mangan | first2 = Tucker | last2 = Higgens | date = June 29, 2020 | access-date = June 29, 2020 | work = [[CNBC]] | archive-date = June 29, 2020 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200629150200/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/29/supreme-court-leaves-consumer-regulator-standing-but-backs-presidents-ability-to-fire-director.html | url-status = live }}</ref>

Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] wrote the majority opinion joined by conservative Justices [[Clarence Thomas]], [[Samuel Alito]], [[Neil Gorsuch]], and [[Brett Kavanaugh]]. Roberts wrote that the CFPB structure with a single point of leadership that could only be removed for cause "has no foothold in history or tradition", and has only been used in four other instances: three current uses for the [[United States Office of Special Counsel]], the [[Social Security Administration]], and the [[Federal Housing Finance Agency]], and temporarily for one year during the [[American Civil War]] for the [[Office of the Comptroller of the Currency]].<ref name="cnbc decision" /> Roberts wrote that the three current uses "are modern and contested. And they do not involve regulatory or enforcement authority comparable to that exercised by the CFPB."<ref name="cnbc decision" /> Roberts also wrote that the CFPB structure "is also incompatible with the structure of the Constitution, which—with the sole exception of the Presidency—scrupulously avoids concentrating power in the hands of any single individual."<ref name="cnbc decision" /> Roberts referred back to the precedent established by ''Humphrey's Executor'' and ''Morrison'' as a basis for the majority's decision.<ref name="reason decision">{{cite web | url = https://reason.com/2020/06/29/with-chief-in-charge-scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-law-and-eliminates-cfpb-independence/ | title = With Chief in Charge, SCOTUS Strikes Down Louisiana Abortion Law and Eliminates CFPB Independence | first = Jonathan | last = Adler | date = June 29, 2020 | access-date = June 29, 2020 | work = [[Reason (magazine)|Reason]] | archive-date = June 29, 2020 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200629232919/https://reason.com/2020/06/29/with-chief-in-charge-scotus-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-law-and-eliminates-cfpb-independence/ | url-status = live }}</ref>

Justice [[Elena Kagan]] wrote the dissent joined by Justices [[Ruth Bader Ginsburg]], [[Stephen Breyer]], and [[Sonia Sotomayor]]. Kagan wrote that "Today's decision wipes out a feature of that agency its creators thought fundamental to its mission—a measure of independence from political pressure."<ref name="cnbc decision" /> Kagan challenged the separation of powers argument presented by the majority: "Nowhere does the text [of the Constitution] say anything about the President's power to remove subordinate officials at will."<ref name="cnbc decision" /> The dissenting Justices did concur on the matter of severability of the remaining structure of the CFPB outside of the director.

===2022 dispute over funding structure===
{{main|Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Limited}}
In 2018, the [[Community Financial Services Association of America]] sued the CFPB over its 2017 rule that blocked lenders to attempt to collect funds from borrowers' accounts after two consecutive failed attempts, unless the borrower had consented. Part of its argument in the case was that the CFPB's budgetary structure was unconstitutional, as it did not receive funding through Congressional appropriations but requested its funding through the Federal Reserve. While the district court ruled against the association, the [[Fifth Circuit]] ruled in favor of the association in October 2022, deeming that its funding structure was unconstitutional.<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-consumer-protection-watchdogs-funding-unconstitutional-court-rules-2022-10-20/ | title = U.S. consumer protection watchdog's funding unconstitutional, court rules | first = Nate | last = Redmond |date = October 20, 2022 | accessdate = October 20, 2022 | work = [[Reuters]] }}</ref> 

That opinion was appealed to the US Supreme Court, which reversed the 5th Circuit and upheld the CFPB's funding mechanism.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Johnson |first1=Jake |title=Existential Threat to CFPB Spotlights Massive Stakes of New Supreme Court Term |url=https://www.commondreams.org/news/cfpb-supreme-court |access-date=15 November 2023 |work=www.commondreams.org |date=2 October 2023 |language=en}}</ref> May 2024, the Court ruled for the CFPB in a 7-2 decision written by Justice [[Clarence Thomas]].<ref>{{Cite web|date=May 16, 2024|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/16/supreme-court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureau-funding-structure-is-legal.html|website=CNBC|title=Supreme Court Rules Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Funding Structure is Legal}}</ref>

===2023 sanctioned over conduct===
The [[United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit|Eleventh Circuit]] affirmed sanctions levied by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau due to its conduct during discovery.<ref>{{cite web |title=Evasive Deposition Tactics by the CFPB Supported Dismissal as a Sanction, Affirmed by Eleventh Circuit |url=https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/evasive-deposition-tactics-by-the-cfpb-4375456/ |website=JD Supra |language=en}}</ref>{{Better source needed|reason=The current source is insufficiently reliable ([[WP:NOTRS]]).|date=August 2024}}

==List of directors==
; Status
{{legend|#FAF0E6|Special Advisor|border=black}}
{{legend|#E6E6AA|Acting Director|border=black}}

{| class="wikitable" style="clear:right; text-align:center"
|-
!No.
! Portrait
! Name
! State of residence
! Took office
! Left office
! Tenure
! colspan="2" |[[President of the United States|Presidents]]
|- style="background:linen;"
| –
| [[File:Elizabeth Warren--Official 113th Congressional Portrait--.jpg|75px|Elizabeth Warren]]
| [[Elizabeth Warren]]
| [[Massachusetts]]
| September 17, 2010
| August 1, 2011
| {{age in years and days|2010|9|17|2011|8|1}}
| rowspan="3" style="background: blue" |
| rowspan="3" style="background:white;" | [[Barack Obama]]
|- style="background:linen;"
|–
| [[File:Raj Date CFPB.jpg|75px|Raj Date]]
| [[Raj Date]]
| [[District of Columbia]]
| August 1, 2011
| January 4, 2012
| {{age in years and days|2011|8|1|2012|1|4}}
|-
| rowspan="2" style="background: {{party color|Democratic Party (United States)}};" |{{color|white|1}}
| rowspan="2" |[[File:Richard Cordray official portrait (cropped).jpg|75px|Richard Cordray]]
| rowspan="2" |[[Richard Cordray]]
| rowspan="2" |[[Ohio]]
| rowspan="2" |January 4, 2012
| rowspan="2" |November 24, 2017<ref>{{cite web|url=https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/24/news/cfpb-richard-cordray-resignation/index.html|title=Richard Cordray resigns as head of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|date=November 24, 2017|publisher=[[CNN Money]]|first=Jackie|last=Wattles}}</ref>
| height="45px" |{{age in years and days|2012|1|4|2017|1|20}}
|- 
| {{age in years and days|2017|1|20|2017|11|24}}<br /><small>({{age in years and days|2012|1|4|2017|11|24}} total)</small>
| rowspan="3" style="background: red" |
| rowspan="3" | [[Donald Trump]]
|- style="background:#e6e6aa;"
| |–
| [[File:Mick Mulvaney official photo (cropped).jpg|75px|Mick Mulvaney]]
| [[Mick Mulvaney]]
| [[South Carolina]]
| November 25, 2017
| December 10, 2018
| {{age in years and days|2017|11|25|2018|12|10}}
|-
| style="background: {{party color|Republican Party (United States)}};" |{{color|white|2}}
| [[File:Kathy Kraninger (cropped).jpg|75px|Mick Mulvaney]]
| [[Kathy Kraninger]]
| [[Ohio]]
| December 11, 2018
| January 20, 2021<ref>{{Cite web|last=Lane|first=Sylvan|date=2021-01-20|title=Consumer bureau director resigns after Biden's inauguration|url=https://thehill.com/policy/finance/535053-consumer-bureau-director-resigns-after-bidens-inauguration/|access-date=2021-01-21|website=[[The Hill (newspaper)|The Hill]]|language=en}}</ref>
| {{age in years and days|2018|12|11|2021|1|20}}
|-
|- style="background:#e6e6aa;"
|–
| [[File:Cfpb dave uejio cropped.png|75px]]
| [[David Uejio]]
| District of Columbia
| January 20, 2021
| October 12, 2021
| {{age in years and days|2021|1|20|2021|10|12}}
| rowspan="2" style="background: blue" |
| rowspan="2" style="background:white;" | [[Joe Biden]]
|- 
| style="background: {{party color|Democratic Party (United States)}};" |{{color|white|3}}
| [[File:Rohit Chopra FTC Portrait (cropped).jpg|75px|Rohit Chopra]]
| [[Rohit Chopra]]
| [[District of Columbia]]
| October 12, 2021
| Incumbent
|{{age in years and days|2021|10|12}}
|}

==See also==
{{Portal|United States|Politics|Business and economics}}
* [[Regulatory responses to the subprime crisis]]
* [[Subprime mortgage crisis solutions debate]]
* [[Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations]]
* [[Volcker Rule]]
* [[Wall Street reform]]
* [[List of financial regulatory authorities by jurisdiction]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
{{sister project links|d=Q1091543|c=Category:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|n=Category:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau|s=no|b=no|v=no|voy=no|m=no|mw=no|species=no|q=no|wikt=no}}
* {{Official website}}
* [https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/consumer-financial-protection-bureau Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] in the [[Federal Register]]
* [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-X 12 CFR Chapter X] of the [[Code of Federal Regulations]]

{{Bank regulation in the United States}}
{{Economic Crisis}}
{{CFPB Directors}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau}}
[[Category:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau| ]]
[[Category:Corporate crime]]
[[Category:Financial regulatory authorities of the United States]]
[[Category:Government agencies established in 2011]]
[[Category:Independent agencies of the United States government]]
[[Category:2011 establishments in Washington, D.C.]]
[[Category:Consumer rights agencies]]