Litigation

A federal judge in Texas is locked in a back-and-forth with an appeals court over whether the industry's challenge to a cap on credit card late fees should be moved to Washington, D.C.

The payday loan industry is looking to extend its years-long legal fight with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It's planning to ask a federal appeals court to revisit a ruling that upheld a proposed limit on how often payday lenders can try to pull money from their customers' accounts.

The Supreme Court issued an opinion Thursday morning that was unequivocal in its view that Congress is constitutionally empowered to fund agencies with open-ended and indirect funding mechanisms, overruling a 5th Circuit opinion from 2022 that found that executive branches must be subject to direct Congressional appropriations.

A federal judge has granted a preliminary injunction against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's credit card late fee rule, pausing it from being implemented days before it was meant to go live.

Many legal experts think the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in a case challenging its funding. Such a ruling would unleash a flurry of litigation that has been on hold pending the outcome of the constitutional challenge.

Business trade groups are expected to prevail in getting an emergency stay to stop the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's $8 late fee rule from going into effect on May 14. However, the lawsuit would still have many steps to go after such a decision.

The case over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's $8 late fee rule has emerged as a flashpoint in a larger debate over "judge shopping," whereby plaintiffs seek venues with judges sympathetic to their complaints.

A federal judge in Texas sided with bank trade groups, agreeing that bank regulators might have overstepped their authority in reforming parts of the Community Reinvestment Act.

The federal court judge determined that Federal Reserve banks are not obligated to grant master accounts. The decision set a precedent that has already been cited in another case.

Judge Mark T. Pittman sided with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in ordering the case be moved from Texas to the District of Columbia due to "forum shopping."