WEBVTT - Bloomberg Law Brief: CFPB Defends Independence (Audio)

0:00:00.000 --> 0:00:02.400
<v Speaker 1>Well, now a time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief,

0:00:02.480 --> 0:00:05.080
<v Speaker 1>exploring legal issues in the news. It's brought to you

0:00:05.120 --> 0:00:09.680
<v Speaker 1>by the American Arbitration Association, International Trade or Business Dispute

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:13.160
<v Speaker 1>Resolve FESTER with the International Center for a Dispute Resolution,

0:00:13.240 --> 0:00:16.400
<v Speaker 1>the leader in alternative dispute resolution around the world i

0:00:16.560 --> 0:00:19.800
<v Speaker 1>c d R dot org. Today Bloomberg, lah Stu and

0:00:19.840 --> 0:00:22.840
<v Speaker 1>Grosso and Greg Store discuss a case over the independence

0:00:22.880 --> 0:00:26.119
<v Speaker 1>of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He speak with dali

0:00:26.160 --> 0:00:29.520
<v Speaker 1>Ye Jimenez, professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law,

0:00:29.760 --> 0:00:33.400
<v Speaker 1>and Christopher Peterson, professor at the University of Utah College

0:00:33.400 --> 0:00:37.559
<v Speaker 1>of Law. Dat let me start with you. The earlier

0:00:37.680 --> 0:00:40.880
<v Speaker 1>ruling had several aspects to it, but let's let's cut

0:00:40.920 --> 0:00:43.159
<v Speaker 1>to the part of it that deals with the president's

0:00:43.159 --> 0:00:46.159
<v Speaker 1>power to fire the director of the CSPB. Can you

0:00:46.240 --> 0:00:51.480
<v Speaker 1>just explain what the panel, uh said about that issue? Yeah? Sure,

0:00:51.920 --> 0:00:56.640
<v Speaker 1>the panel decided that it didn't the separate from the

0:00:56.720 --> 0:01:01.680
<v Speaker 1>sort of statutory problems um that the PhH Company was

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:05.160
<v Speaker 1>bringing against the CFPP. They would decide they would look

0:01:05.200 --> 0:01:07.840
<v Speaker 1>at whether or not the structure of the CFPP is

0:01:07.840 --> 0:01:12.360
<v Speaker 1>actually constitutional um and which uh, maybe it was something

0:01:12.360 --> 0:01:14.399
<v Speaker 1>that they didn't actually have to do. And in doing that,

0:01:14.440 --> 0:01:17.720
<v Speaker 1>they decided that it was unconstitutional that um, there was

0:01:17.800 --> 0:01:20.800
<v Speaker 1>only one director and that they could only be uh

0:01:20.800 --> 0:01:24.440
<v Speaker 1>that that director could be fired um only for cause um.

0:01:24.520 --> 0:01:28.000
<v Speaker 1>And so they decided that uh that instead um uh,

0:01:28.040 --> 0:01:31.720
<v Speaker 1>the way to fix it was to say to basically

0:01:31.760 --> 0:01:34.280
<v Speaker 1>rewrite the statute and say that the director can be

0:01:34.319 --> 0:01:37.240
<v Speaker 1>fired for any reason at the will of the president UM.

0:01:37.440 --> 0:01:40.080
<v Speaker 1>And so obviously making it a lot easier for now

0:01:40.120 --> 0:01:43.520
<v Speaker 1>President Trump to fire the director. But now that decision

0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:47.240
<v Speaker 1>has been vacated, now that the full Court has decided

0:01:47.480 --> 0:01:52.920
<v Speaker 1>to hear the decase again. And Christopher, what is the

0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:57.480
<v Speaker 1>reasoning for the full court taking on the case? Well,

0:01:57.520 --> 0:02:00.320
<v Speaker 1>I think the full court is is recognized. I think

0:02:00.320 --> 0:02:03.240
<v Speaker 1>that the case, first off, is very important, that it

0:02:03.320 --> 0:02:07.800
<v Speaker 1>has significant implications both for this new UH consumer Protection Agency,

0:02:08.280 --> 0:02:10.800
<v Speaker 1>but also for the power of the presidency of the

0:02:10.880 --> 0:02:13.640
<v Speaker 1>United States. UH. And what's more, I think that the

0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:16.359
<v Speaker 1>it's I think it's fair to say that the DC

0:02:16.440 --> 0:02:22.280
<v Speaker 1>Circuit panel opinion was um someone uncharitable to the motives

0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:25.360
<v Speaker 1>and the structure of the CFPB. So I think that,

0:02:25.440 --> 0:02:27.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, look to takeaway is that the the entire

0:02:28.040 --> 0:02:30.000
<v Speaker 1>DC circuit is going to look at the case and

0:02:30.280 --> 0:02:33.760
<v Speaker 1>uh it has implications about whether or not President Trump

0:02:33.800 --> 0:02:36.520
<v Speaker 1>will may be able to is effectively assert his agenda

0:02:36.919 --> 0:02:40.160
<v Speaker 1>uh in in in you know, pursuing de regulatory goals

0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:44.560
<v Speaker 1>for the economy. That's Christopher Peterson, Professor at the University

0:02:44.600 --> 0:02:47.600
<v Speaker 1>of Utah College of Law and dali Ye him Menez,

0:02:47.639 --> 0:02:51.359
<v Speaker 1>Professor at University of Connecticut School of Law, speaking of Bloomberg,

0:02:51.440 --> 0:02:53.919
<v Speaker 1>Laho stun Grosso and Greg Stewart. You can listen to

0:02:53.960 --> 0:02:57.400
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm Wall Street Time here

0:02:57.560 --> 0:03:00.880
<v Speaker 1>on Bloomberg Radio, and that is this morning is Bloomberg Lawbrary.

0:03:00.880 --> 0:03:03.359
<v Speaker 1>If you can find more legal news at Bloomberg Law

0:03:03.520 --> 0:03:07.600
<v Speaker 1>dot com and Bloomberg b NA dot com. Attorneys will

0:03:07.639 --> 0:03:11.160
<v Speaker 1>find exceptional legal research and business development tools there as well.

0:03:11.639 --> 0:03:14.359
<v Speaker 1>Visit Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg b and A

0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:16.160
<v Speaker 1>dot com for more information