Followers | 45 |
Posts | 7114 |
Boards Moderated | 0 |
Alias Born | 07/18/2020 |
![](https://investorshub.advfn.com/uicon/752721.png?cb=1608466103)
Monday, February 27, 2023 5:37:54 PM
Here's CFPB Petition:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/246429/20221114155607407_No.%20CFPB%20et%20al.%20v.%20CFSA%20et%20al.pdf
QUESTION PRESENTED
Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the
statute providing funding to the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB), 12 U.S.C. 5497, violates the
Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const. Art. I, § 9, Cl. 7, and
in vacating a regulation promulgated at a time when the
CFPB was receiving such funding.
Here's Noel Francisco's Cross Petition for a Writ of Certerrori:
CROSS-PETITION FOR
A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
This case involves a challenge to the validity of a
single regulation promulgated by the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau). As
relevant here, the Rule prohibits a covered lender
from continuing to make preauthorized attempts to
withdraw loan repayments from a consumer’s bank
account after two consecutive attempts are denied for
insufficient funds. 82 Fed. Reg. 54,472, 54,877-79
(Nov. 17, 2017). Cross-Petitioners (the Lenders)
claimed that the Rule is unlawful on several
grounds, and the court of appeals vacated the Rule
on one ground after rejecting the others.
In No. 22-448, the Bureau has filed a certiorari
petition seeking review of the holding below that the
Rule should be vacated because the statute
authorizing the agency’s funding violates the
Appropriations Clause. This Court should deny that
petition for the reasons explained in the Lenders’
opposition brief.
If the Court grants the Bureau’s petition, however,
it should either grant this cross-petition or add to the
Board’s petition two antecedent questions that also
are presented by the judgment under review:
1. Whether the Rule should be vacated because it
was promulgated by Director Cordray while shielded
from removal by President Trump under a statutory
provision this Court later held is unconstitutional.
2. Whether the Rule should be vacated because
the prohibited conduct falls outside the statutory
definition of unfair or abusive conduct.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-448/246429/20221114155607407_No.%20CFPB%20et%20al.%20v.%20CFSA%20et%20al.pdf
THAT said, no question that the front and center issue here is the Appropriations Clause issue and REMEDY.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fannie-mae-releases-january-2023-210500758.html
FEATURED Freedom Holdings Corporate Update; Announces Management Has Signed Letter of Intent • Jul 3, 2024 9:00 AM
EWRC's 21 Moves Gaming Studios Moves to SONY Pictures Studios and Green Lights Development of a Third Upcoming Game • EWRC • Jul 2, 2024 8:00 AM
BNCM and DELEX Healthcare Group Announce Strategic Merger to Drive Expansion and Growth • BNCM • Jul 2, 2024 7:19 AM
NUBURU Announces Upcoming TV Interview Featuring CEO Brian Knaley on Fox Business, Bloomberg TV, and Newsmax TV as Sponsored Programming • BURU • Jul 1, 2024 1:57 PM
Mass Megawatts Announces $220,500 Debt Cancellation Agreement to Improve Financing and Sales of a New Product to be Announced on July 11 • MMMW • Jun 28, 2024 7:30 AM
VAYK Exited Caribbean Investments for $320,000 Profit • VAYK • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM