Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court Thursday ruled that how the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is funded does not violate the Constitution, reversing a lower court decision. Comments below from Duke University professor Mallory SoRelle, an expert on consumer financial protection, are available to use in your coverage.
Quote:
“Today’s 7-2 Supreme Court ruling affirms the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding, preserving — at least for now — the only federal watchdog designed to protect people’s finances,” says Mallory E. SoRelle, an assistant professor at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy.
“This is a huge win for consumers, who have benefited over the past decade from the CFPB’s enactment of new financial protections and enforcement actions that have returned over $17.5 billion directly to the pockets of consumers.”
“As my research shows, this victory also means preserving an agency that makes it easier for both public interest groups and ordinary borrowers to influence consumer financial protection rulemaking as well as for consumers to seek help more easily through the CFPB complaint process.”
Bio:
Mallory SoRelle is an assistant professor at the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University. Her research and teaching explore how public policies are produced by, and critically how they reproduce, socioeconomic and political inequality in the United States. She focuses primarily on issues like consumer financial protection and access to civil justice that fundamentally shape the welfare of marginalized communities yet are often overlooked by scholars of the welfare state because they are not traditional redistributive programs.
For additional comment, contact Mallory SoRelle at:
mallory.sorelle@duke.edu
—
Media Contact:
Steve Hartsoe
steve.hartsoe@duke.edu