Showing 3 posts in Statutory Interpretation.

A World Without Chevron? U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Cases that Could Overturn 40-Year-Old Doctrine of Statutory Interpretation

On January 18, 2024, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two cases challenging the Chevron doctrine of statutory interpretation, Loper Bright Enterprises, et al., v. Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce (Loper-Bright) and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce (Relentless). Under the Chevron doctrine, courts are supposed to grant deference to an agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute. More ›

Uniformity Achieved: Third Circuit Rules There is No Written Requirement to Dispute Validity of a Debt Under FDCPA

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued an en banc decision in Riccio v. Sentry Credit, overturning Graziano v. Harrison, after finding that there is no written dispute requirement in Section 1692g(a)(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). According to the court, this decision ends "a circuit split and restores national uniformity to the meaning of §1692g." Moreover, the decision applies retroactively to any claim still open on the issue, thus closing the chapter on a written requirement for Section 1692g. More ›

Trouble With A Capital C: Cordray’s Move To Name His Own Successor At The CFPB

In contrast to his big wins on Jeopardy! in the 1980s, Richard Cordray lost badly in 2017 after staking so much on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (“CFPB”) Final Rule, which would have prohibited the use of class action waivers in the arbitration clauses of consumer financial contracts, such as credit card agreements and mortgages. The CFPB’s Final Rule drew sharp, valid criticism from both the U.S. Treasury Department and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. After the House of Representatives and the Senate acted pursuant to the Congressional Review Act to nullify the Final Rule, Mr. Cordray pleaded unsuccessfully with President Trump for a veto. It is unsurprising, really, that he decided to step down far earlier than anticipated.

Mr. Cordray’s parting-shot - his effort to name his own successor by appointing a presumably sympathetic Deputy Director - will likely miss its mark. Under the provision of Dodd-Frank that Senator Elizabeth Warren has cited in support of Mr. Cordray’s maneuver, the CFPB’s Deputy Director serves as acting Director only “in the absence or unavailability of the Director” (12 U.S.C. § 5491(b)(5)), not in the event the Director resigns. Moreover, 12 U.S.C. § 5491(b)(3) states that, “…the Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”  Senator Warren’s November 24th “tweet,” that “if there is a [CFPB] Director vacancy, the Deputy Director becomes the Acting Director … [and] [President Trump] can’t override that[,]” simply appears to read too much into the provision of Dodd-Frank she cites. More ›