Amicus Brief from the pro CFPB funding mechanism states focuses on remedy (I added bold):
"We file this amicus brief, however, to address
specifically the remedial issue in the event that the
Court were to find a constitutional defect, explaining
that the remedy imposed by the court below was neither
justified nor compelled by law, and that this issue also
warrants this Court’s review. The remedy imposed
below would deprive the States and their residents not
only of the protections given by the specific regulation at
issue, but also of the CFPB’s role more broadly as a fed-
eral regulator and enforcer of consumer financial laws.
Left undisturbed, the court of appeals’ reasoning could
jeopardize many of the CFPB’s actions from across its
decade-long existence, to the detriment of both consum-
ers protected by those actions and financial-services
providers that rely on them to guide their conduct."
Congress established a clear funding structure for
the CFPB to “ensure that the Bureau has the funds to
perform its mission,” without being placed under
“repeated Congressional pressure.” S. Rep. No. 111-176,
at 163. Indeed, Congress observed that the annual
appropriations process was “widely acknowledged” to
have limited the effectiveness of the former Office of
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight—a predecessor
to the Federal Housing Finance Agency that had
unsuccessfully regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
leading up to the financial crisis. See id.; see also
OFHEO’s Final Report on Fannie Mae: Hearing Before
the Subcomm. on Capital Markets, Insurance, and
Government Sponsored Enterprises of the H. Comm. on Fin. Servs., 109th Cong. 3 (2007) (statement of Rep.
Michael G. Oxley, Chairman, H. Comm. on Fin. Servs.).
The CFP Act therefore provides that the CFPB is
funded through “the combined earnings of the Federal
Reserve System” through a specific “Bureau Fund” of the
Federal Reserve. 12 U.S.C. § 5497(a), (b)(1)."
