In its June 21 decision in Lucia v. Securities & Exchange Commission, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that administrative law judges (ALJs) used by the SEC are “Officers of the United States” under the Appointments Clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution because they exercise “significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States.” … Continue Reading
Search lucia
Supreme Court Will Hear Lucia’s Challenge to Appointment of SEC ALJs
On January 12, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Lucia case in which Raymond J. Lucia is challenging how the SEC appoints administrative law judges (“ALJs”). He argues that ALJs are “inferior officers” who must be appointed by the President, the courts, or a department head in accordance with the Constitution’s appointments clause.… Continue Reading
DOJ sides with Lucia against the SEC in dispute over whether ALJs are inferior officers
The Supreme Court is considering a cert petition requesting that it hear the Lucia case, which we have blogged about extensively due to its potential impact on the outcome of the PHH case. Significantly, the DOJ recently filed a brief in the case siding against the SEC and with Lucia, who is challenging the constitutionality of how the SEC’s Administrative Law Judges (“ALJs”) are appointed.… Continue Reading
Lucia appeals D.C. Circuit ruling to Supreme Court
On July 21, 2017, an investment adviser sought review by the Supreme Court of the D.C. Circuit’s recent ruling in Lucia that allowed to stand a district court decision holding that SEC administrative law judges (“ALJs”) are not officers subject to the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution. We’ve blogged about Lucia extensively because the issue in that case has the potential to impact the outcome of the PHH case.… Continue Reading
Supreme Court hears arguments over jurisdiction for constitutional challenges to FTC’s enforcement authority
The Supreme Court heard arguments yesterday in Axon Enterprise v. Federal Trade Commission (No. 21-86), as to whether federal courts can hear a challenge to the FTC’s constitutionality by a party in an administrative proceeding before the agency has issued a final order. The Court also heard arguments in a similar case, Securities and Exchange Commission v.… Continue Reading
Tenth Circuit affirms CFPB order requiring payment of restitution and civil penalties by lender and its CEO
In Integrity Advance LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed a CFPB Order requiring Integrity, a lender making short-term loans, and its CEO, James Carnes, to pay $38.4 million in legal and equitable restitution and imposing civil penalties against Integrity ($7.5 million) and Carnes ($5 million), for alleged violations of the Consumer Financial Protection Act, the Truth in Lending Act, and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. … Continue Reading
Federal court rules constitutional challenge did not allow stay of CFPB order requiring payment of restitution and civil money penalties
Despite the pendency in the Tenth Circuit of a constitutional challenge to a CFPB administrative order that requires a lender and its CEO to pay restitution and civil money penalties, a Kansas federal district court recently refused to stay enforcement of the order.
In CFPB v. Integrity Advance, LLC and James R.… Continue Reading
President Trump issues executive order to change process used by CFPB and other federal agencies for hiring administrative law judges
In response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lucia v. SEC, President Trump has issued an executive order that changes the process used by federal agencies for administrative law judges (ALJs).
In Lucia, the Supreme Court ruled that administrative law judges (ALJs) used by the SEC are “Officers of the United States” under the Appointments Clause in Article II of the U.S.… Continue Reading
D.C. Circuit Rules CFPB’s View of RESPA Was Wrong But its Structure is Constitutional
On January 31, 2018, the en banc D.C. Circuit handed down its opinion in the PHH v. CFPB case, which we’ve discussed at length. It held, 7 to 3, that the CFPB’s single-director-removable-only-for-cause structure is constitutional but that the CFPB’s interpretation of RESPA was wrong.
En Banc Court Reinstates Panel’s RESPA Ruling
The en banc Court reinstated the RESPA-related portions of the D.C.… Continue Reading
CFPB seeks comments on its administrative enforcement proceedings
The CFPB has issued a request for information that seeks comment on how the CFPB can improve its administrative adjudication processes, including its “Rules of Practice for Adjudication Proceedings” codified at 12 CFR part 1081, Subpart E (Rules). The Rules address the general conduct of administrative enforcement proceedings, the initiation of such proceedings and prehearing rules, decisions and appeals, and temporary cease-and-desist proceedings. … Continue Reading