Jul 15, 2020

see https://library.nclc.org/impact-supreme-court-seila-law-ruling-cfpb-constitutionality

It has long been held, assumed  and otherwise inscribed in law that Congress is the sole source of appropriating money for the federal government to spend. That is pursuant to the supreme law of the land.

And it has also been long held that Congress can put conditions on its appropriation of money either for an existing Federal agency or a new one. Such conditions can be event or monetary thresholds or controls to retain maximum Congressional oversight to see to it that the President is not doing anything contrary to the congressional mandate.

Yes that is how it works in our country.

So it is both dangerous and irksome that the Supreme court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided that the head of one of the only agencies exclusively devoted to protection of consumers could be fired without cause despite a congressional mandate to the contrary.

Besides the obvious effects on consumers and borrowers in particular, this decision could be a harbinger of still more unrestrained presidential power leading to autocracy. You may like it now if you align with republicans, but you won’t like it later when the shoe is on the other foot.

By politicizing the highest court in the land we have stepped on another rake. This will cost us as taxpayers, consumers, borrowers and citizens.