SCOTUS Watch: More Trump Enabling

The CFPB emerged in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis with the mission of "enforcing federal consumer financial laws and protecting consumers." As of December 2024, the CFPB reported it had recovered up to $21 billion in compensation, debt cancellation, and other forms of relief for American consumers. 

The director, to protect their independence, could only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office." The Supreme Court, 5-4, struck down this independence. It is somehow a violation of executive power to have them execute congressional law here.

Justice Kagan in dissent explained the problems, appealing to history and principle. The problem then became how far the majority would take its reasoning. The ultimate target appeared to be Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935). 

(That ruling limited a 1920s ruling, written by Chief Justice Taft, a former president, Myers v. U.S. Nonetheless, that opinion was far from compelling. Three justices, including Holmes and Brandeis, provided strong dissents.)

The target was in Trump's sights as he started to attack the independence of multiple agencies. The shadow docket was used with little analysis to help him. Kagan, for the liberals, again strongly dissented.  One problem was the chickenshit way the justices (anonymously) were doing it.

The process continued today. The majority now attacked the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Kagan again dissented for the liberals. 

The slipshod way the conservatives went about it was so bad that Kavanaugh concurred, saying he would be more above-board. He went along, though. He's basically Susan Collins, a suitable comparison, since she voted for him. 

Judge Don Willett, a Trump nominee, was one of the lower court judges who followed precedent. That is, after all, what they are supposed to do. They are not supposed to overturn precedent because the Supreme Court, by winks and nods (“not conclusive as to the merits” but  “inform how a court should exercise its”), implies something.  

Maybe, Trump 2.0 judges -- now starting to be confirmed -- will be better able to interpret the "cues" as one "reasonable" conservative (who is rooting for those judges) framed it. 

Or, the justices can just bite the bullet and go all the way, which would be wrong, but at least halfway credible procedurally. What a corrupt bunch of assholes. Can't they just enjoy their summer as this old drawing portrays?

Kennedy (standing next to Roberts) is buff!