The 5th Circuit just declared an entire federal agency unconstitutional

[berg80]

America’s Trumpiest court just declared an entire federal agency unconstitutional

Three judges appointed by former President Donald Trump handed down an astonishing decision on Wednesday, effectively holding that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the federal agency charged with protecting consumers from a wide range of predatory activity by lenders and other financial services, is unconstitutional and must be stripped of its authority.

The decision by the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit relies on a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution, and is entirely at odds with a Supreme Court decision that rejects the Fifth Circuit’s reading of that provision. This is not unusual behavior from the Fifth Circuit, which often reads the Constitution in novel and unexpected ways that benefit political conservatives and the Republican Party.

Indeed, Judge Cory Wilson admits in the court’s new opinion in Community Financial Services v. CFPB that “every court to consider” the arguments presented in this case has deemed the CFPB to be “constitutionally sound.”
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...rcuit-supreme-court-trump-community-financial

Repubs have had a hardon for the CFPB ever since its inception. Apparently they hate consumer protections because it keeps their corporate masters from ripping off citizens.

With Republican rise, payday loan companies became a potent political force. Cash-strapped Tennesseans pay the price.​

With Republican rise, payday loan companies became a potent political force. Cash-strapped Tennesseans pay the price.

Kiyadh Burt lending analyst with Hope Policy Institute. NASHVILLE– For years, Carlos Restrepo operated a small trucking business in Nashville– until his insurance rates unexpectedly increased. After defaulting on the loan, Advance Financial sued him, and according to court documents, he will pay...

insurancenewsnet.com

 

[whitehall]

It's only "obscure" when lefties hate it.

 

[TNHarley]

It is unconstitutional.

 

[Oddball]

America’s Trumpiest court just declared an entire federal agency unconstitutional

Three judges appointed by former President Donald Trump handed down an astonishing decision on Wednesday, effectively holding that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the federal agency charged with protecting consumers from a wide range of predatory activity by lenders and other financial services, is unconstitutional and must be stripped of its authority.

The decision by the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit relies on a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution, and is entirely at odds with a Supreme Court decision that rejects the Fifth Circuit’s reading of that provision. This is not unusual behavior from the Fifth Circuit, which often reads the Constitution in novel and unexpected ways that benefit political conservatives and the Republican Party.

Indeed, Judge Cory Wilson admits in the court’s new opinion in Community Financial Services v. CFPB that “every court to consider” the arguments presented in this case has deemed the CFPB to be “constitutionally sound.”
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...rcuit-supreme-court-trump-community-financial

Repubs have had a hardon for the CFPB ever since its inception. Apparently they hate consumer protections because it keeps their corporate masters from ripping off citizens.

With Republican rise, payday loan companies became a potent political force. Cash-strapped Tennesseans pay the price.​

With Republican rise, payday loan companies became a potent political force. Cash-strapped Tennesseans pay the price.

Kiyadh Burt lending analyst with Hope Policy Institute. NASHVILLE– For years, Carlos Restrepo operated a small trucking business in Nashville– until his insurance rates unexpectedly increased. After defaulting on the loan, Advance Financial sued him, and according to court documents, he will pay...

insurancenewsnet.com

 

[Votto]

It is unconstitutional.

But Democrats don't care about that, they just look at things as good or bad and ignore the Constitution

That is, unless the Constitution agrees with what they want to do, of course.

 

[berg80]

It's only "obscure" when lefties hate it.

The decision by the conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit relies on a novel reading of an obscure provision of the Constitution, and is entirely at odds with a Supreme Court decision that rejects the Fifth Circuit’s reading of that provision.

Cincinnati Soap Co. v. United States, 301 U.S. 308 (1937)

Cincinnati Soap Co. v. United States

supreme.justia.com

 

[berg80]

It is unconstitutional.

The SC disagrees.

 

[TNHarley]

The SC disagrees.

And?

 

[berg80]

This is not unusual behavior from the Fifth Circuit, which often reads the Constitution in novel and unexpected ways that benefit political conservatives and the Republican Party.

Two Republican judges just let Texas seize control of Twitter and Facebook​

Two Republican judges just let Texas seize control of Twitter and Facebook

The Fifth Circuit wants to put Texas Republicans in charge of social media platforms.

www.vox.com

An especially right-wing panel of the already conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down an astonishing opinion on Friday, effectively holding that the state of Texas may seize control of content moderation at major social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

The mere fact that this opinion exists is not surprising. When Texas initially passed the law at hand, which imposes strong restrictions on major social media companies’ power to moderate content and ban users deemed to be offensive or worse, the same panel of judges raced to defend it.

Trade organizations representing the major social media companies sued to block the law from taking effect, and a federal trial court agreed with them. In May, the Fifth Circuit handed down a brief, unexplained order in NetChoice v. Paxton, which reinstated the Texas law — until the Supreme Court blocked that decision a few weeks later, effectively suspending the law once again.

 

[berg80]

And?

And I'll take the SC's opinion over yours.

 

[TNHarley]

And I'll take the SC's opinion over yours.

Where does the constitution give power to anyone besides congress to make federal laws?

 

[Oddball]

And I'll take the SC's opinion over yours.

Dred Scott was also a SC decision....I bet you would have stood by that one too.

 

[TNHarley]

Dred Scott was also a SC decision....I bet you would have stood by that one too.

plessy vs ferguson?
wolf vs colorado?
Bah bah

 

[Vrenn]

But Democrats don't care about that, they just look at things as good or bad and ignore the Constitution

That is, unless the Constitution agrees with what they want to do, of course.

And what universe are you in again?

 

[BlindBoo]

Where does the constitution give power to anyone besides congress to make federal laws?

Dodd–Frank, 2010 created the agency.

 

[Ralph Norton]

This is not unusual behavior from the Fifth Circuit, which often reads the Constitution in novel and unexpected ways that benefit political conservatives and the Republican Party.

Two Republican judges just let Texas seize control of Twitter and Facebook​

Two Republican judges just let Texas seize control of Twitter and Facebook

The Fifth Circuit wants to put Texas Republicans in charge of social media platforms.

www.vox.com

An especially right-wing panel of the already conservative United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit handed down an astonishing opinion on Friday, effectively holding that the state of Texas may seize control of content moderation at major social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

The mere fact that this opinion exists is not surprising. When Texas initially passed the law at hand, which imposes strong restrictions on major social media companies’ power to moderate content and ban users deemed to be offensive or worse, the same panel of judges raced to defend it.

Trade organizations representing the major social media companies sued to block the law from taking effect, and a federal trial court agreed with them. In May, the Fifth Circuit handed down a brief, unexplained order in NetChoice v. Paxton, which reinstated the Texas law — until the Supreme Court blocked that decision a few weeks later, effectively suspending the law once again.

Well, if Vox says so, it must be true.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Less Fed employees....make it so

 

[TNHarley]

Dodd–Frank, 2010 created the agency.

thanks. I wasnt aware.

 

[Donald H]

An example of what is expected with the rise of fascism. They won't be waiting for any bothersome election.

 

[BlindBoo]

thanks. I wasnt aware.

The decision is over the funding for the agency not the agency itself, btw.