Supreme Court rejects challenge to CFPB funding
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 тра 2024
- #supremecourt #cfpb #funding #yahoofinance
The Supreme Court voted 7-2 to reject attempts to undercut funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The move will allow the agency to maintain its current funding structure, which trade associations representing payday lenders and credit access companies argued was unconstitutional. Yahoo Finance's Legal Reporter Alexis Keenan breaks down this pivotal decision, shedding light on the motivation behind lenders' push to slash the agency's funding. For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Market Domination. This post was written by Angel Smith
About Yahoo Finance:
Yahoo Finance provides free stock ticker data, up-to-date news, portfolio management resources, comprehensive market data, advanced tools, and more information to help you manage your financial life.
- Get the latest news and data at finance.yahoo.com
- Download the Yahoo Finance app on Apple (apple.co/3Rten0R) or Android (bit.ly/3t8UnXO)
- Follow Yahoo Finance on social:
X: / yahoofinance
Instagram: yahoofinanc...
TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@yahoofinance?...
Facebook: / yahoofinance
LinkedIn: / yahoo-finance
A few years ago, I spent months trying to get help (fighting an identity thief) from multiple government agencies. Only the CFPB helped me.
Should not have even gotten that far.
As a mortgage broker, this is very pertinent news as the CFPB regulates my entire industry it’s one of the biggest things you learned about on the exam
Colour me surprised. about time common sense is shown in the sc
ooooh snap!
supreme court did the right thing!
dafuq?
Most likely for the same reason Roberts upheld Obamacare back in the day - because of such precedent opening a pandora's box that would likely be imposed on *their* interests. Roberts understood striking it down would've made federal taxes more of a question than a mandate.
I don't know that's what happened here with any certainty, I'm just saying it's usually a solid first line of reasoning when things like this happen with SCOTUS.
CFPB is the only organization that help consumers theres nothing in between
Congress can put limits on this bureaucracy at any time.
From the big Feliz Navidad
WE NEED COMPANYS TO BE CONTROLLED ON THEIR LOANS,IF NOT WE HAVE NOTHING BUT LOAN SHARKS!!!
Cool story. Now do credit card (banks) lenders. Talk about predatory; how's over 20% APR taste? Where's CFPB at on that issue? Oh wait, the banks get their $ from the Federal Reserve which is a private entity.
Thomas and Alito departed from each other. What a miracle!
If it is anything that helps ordinary Americans, you can be sure most conservatives are against it.
Con-artist liberal bureaucrats that setup the program and are misusing the money are not ordinary Americans. The government only helps itself.
Conservatives??? Uhh more like liberals
Considering they just said 75% of Republican lawmakers support it, your statement is pathetically biased and uninformed.
@@Sir_Loin_ Which social program did liberals wipe out?
@@Sir_Loin_ Supreme Court judges are mostly conservative.
This Supreme Court actually got something right? Damn!
Why doesn't congress pass a law regulating predatory loans, fees and have the Dept of Justice enforce it like do all other laws? Creating another agency upon all the others only contributes to a bloated government with more expenses.
GOP in congress introduced a bill to lift credit card fee cap. Thats right, the party that can't agree on anything are trying to get together to let credit card companies charge you more money than the 30% interest lmao
@@Plutogalaxy Yes, letting the rich self regulate and control markets always works great for everyone. Things have only been getting better since we started massively deregulations and tax cuts since the 1970s right?
So what has been happening? middle class earnings asbostely staying flat and middle class dying while the rich's wealth has grown thousands of times over.
What ever yahoo is for is wrong and morally absent
If it helps americans u can b sure Demoncrats will b against it!
Funny since it was Democrats that fought to keep it
@kingduck3192 you mean like their border bill that did nothing for the border?
Depends on your definition of "Americans". Obviously, your definition excludes all but the most exploitative, bigoted, and authoritarian.
Conservatives and Democrats
It was Democrats that fought for the common man. You have it backwards.