An Oct. 3, 2023, AP item carried by Seattle Times:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed likely to preserve the work of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau against a conservative-led challenge.
[...] The CFPB case is one of several major challenges to federal regulatory agencies on the docket this term for a court that has for more than a decade been open to limits on their operations. The CFPB, the brainchild of Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, has long been opposed by Republicans and their financial backers.
But a majority of the court appeared ready to reject the sweeping arguments made by the lawyer for payday lenders whose challenge to a CFPB rule spawned the Supreme Court case. A ruling for the agency also would quiet concerns about the validity of the CFPB’s actions since its creation.
Unlike most federal agencies, the consumer bureau does not rely on the annual budget process in Congress. Instead, it is funded directly by the Federal Reserve, with a current annual limit of around $600 million.
The federal appeals court in New Orleans, in a novel ruling, held that the funding violated the Constitution’s appropriations clause because it improperly insulates the CFPB from congressional supervision.
[...] “This is a perpetual delegation to pick your own number,” said [payday lender lawyer Noel] Francisco, who served as the Trump administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer.
[...] “Congress could change it tomorrow. There’s nothing permanent or perpetual about this,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said.
Justice Elena Kagan said that Francisco’s arguments were “flying in the face of 250 years of history.”
Justice Samuel Alito was the most aggressive questioner when Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the Biden administration’s top lawyer, defended the CFPB.
While the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and some other business interests backed the payday lenders, mortgage bankers and other sectors regulated by the CFPB cautioned the court to avoid a broad ruling that could unsettle the markets.
[...]
[italics added] The Fifth Circuit 3-judge appellate panel members that reversed a trial court outcome to embrace the quaint payday lender argument of unconstitutionality were each dregs appointed by Trump. His poisoning of the Judiciary reached well beyond his packing up the Supreme Court with activist neo - Conservatives, (as he was ordered to do by Leonard Leo via the Federalist Society).
Undoing The Trump-Leo mischief will take decades.
So far Biden has had but a single Justice appointed. In a second term he may have more reform powers, including possible expansion of the number of seats on the Court. If the Dems in the 2024 election retake the House while holding the Senate and White House, it will be a situation where Court expansion could pass.
Reform is needed to have a better spectrum of Court outlooks. Also, with Clarence Thomas still around, ethics reform cries out to be somehow fashioned.