The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a conservative-led attack that could have undermined the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The justices ruled 7-2 that the way the agency is funded does not violate the Constitution, reversing a lower court. The CFPB was created after the 2008 financial crisis to regulate mortgages, car loans and other consumer finance.
Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
Honestly shocked Clarence Thomas thought other people needed financial protection. Or cared about other people at all.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day…
With Clarence Thomas it’s once every few decades.
He doesn’t.
This is just his hall pass vote to make him appear less of an ideologue for later, when he proceeds to fuck the country over for Trump.
7-2
I bet, can guess who those 2 were without even looking.
Justice Clarence Thomas reached back to the earliest days of the Constitution in his majority opinion to note that “the Bureau’s funding mechanism fits comfortably with the First Congress’ appropriations practice.”
Hmmm… surprising… maybe public pressure does work.
Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, Thomas’ colleagues in the court’s conservative bloc, dissented. “The Court upholds a novel statutory scheme under which the powerful Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) may bankroll its own agenda without any congressional control or oversight,” Alito wrote.
No more powerful then the billionaires that get to bribe officials and run the show.
Not a big surprise about Alito and Gorsuch, but who bribed Clarence Thomas to do the right thing?
I thought Gorsuch was one of the more sane ones? Is there a website to track votes?
Gorsuch has a libertarian streak, which makes him deviate from some of the more authoritarian conservative positions. It unfortunately also means that he hates government oversight.
I know there have been some sketchy instances or things that look like bribery (and may very well have been bribery) but in general I think people massively overstate the effects of bribery in politics. These people are crazy and believe the things they say, that’s why the money put them into the position they are in. This does mean that they do principled things all the time, the foundation of their beliefs is just fucked and incomprehensible to normal people.
In politics? Yes. When it comes to Clarence Thomas in specific, no. It is very clear that he can be and has been bribed.
These people are crazy and believe the things they say, that’s why the money put them into the position they are in
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
~ Upton Sinclair
Wait, so now Alito gives a shit about oversight??? Guess it’s “oversight for thee, but not for me.”
Holy fuck, I absolutely did not expect this outcome at all. The CFPB is so necessary, so I assumed the court was going to throw it out. This makes me more optimistic about Chevron.
Wow! A rare decision in favor of the consumer! In general, it probably should have some sort of oversight elsewhere, but that should probably wait until we make it illegal to have the bribery that goes on every day in Congress.
If the R’s take back the White House, this will probably be on the chopping block.
Here’s the case’s name that the author felt wasn’t relevant to the story and a link so you can actually read the opinion for anyone interested:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Assn. of America, Ltd., 601 U.S. ___ (2024)
Considering this unexpected win plus a few times when I expected the liberal justices to dissent but they didn’t, I’m starting to wonder if there’s some deal-making going on behind the scenes.
There’s always deal-making going on behind the scenes.
It’s almost universally the one constant that can be relied on under any circumstance
This announcement is entirely part of a plan trying to build up good will before ruling Trump immune from everything.
