SCOTUS

In a split 5-4 decision, the justices gave presidents new power to remove the agency's head at will. The ruling could have far-reaching implications for other regulators with single directors.

With just 13 decisions remaining on the docket this session, the high court's highly anticipated ruling in a case challenging the agency's leadership structure could come as early as next Monday.

The court’s liberal bloc and Chief Justice John Roberts, who holds a crucial swing vote, appeared reluctant to remove a contentious provision that limits a president’s ability to fire a sitting director of the bureau.

John Roberts could play a familiar role as the swing vote in determining whether the Supreme Court curbs the consumer bureau’s power.

Democratic lawmakers, state attorneys general and others filed briefs with the Supreme Court rebutting claims that the agency’s leadership structure is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court appointed Paul Clement to represent the agency after the bureau’s current director questioned its constitutionality.

The case before the court deals mainly with a statutory clause limiting the president’s ability to fire a CFPB director. But briefs filed with the court say striking that provision does not fully solve the bureau’s constitutional problems.

The high court scheduled oral arguments on March 3 in the lawsuit dealing with a president's ability to fire the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The Supreme Court is ready to weigh in on the CFPB’s leadership structure, but both agencies are facing similar constitutional challenges, suggesting a broader impact of any decision.

A lower court “erred” when it sided with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s investors, the Justice Department said in its petition to the high court.

Will the justices go further than answering constitutional questions about the bureau's leadership structure?

The high court will decide how much latitude a president has to fire the director of an independent agency.

In her second day of congressional testimony, Kathy Kraninger took heat from Senate Democrats for weighing in on constitutional questions about her agency and for her enforcement track record.

A list of upcoming cases published by the high court did not include a challenge to the bureau's constitutionality, but the justices could still decide to review it at a later date.

The two Democrats waded into a court battle over the president's ability to fire a director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

By declaring that she has too much statutory power, the agency’s director has potentially opened a floodgate of litigation.

The shareholders' claims against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's regulator mirror arguments in cases challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

If the court agrees to hear the case, its conservative majority could make it easier for a president to fire a CFPB director, though other outcomes are possible.

The agency's director told congressional leaders and staff that she backs a Supreme Court challenge to the bureau's leadership structure.

Federal appeals court judges in New Orleans on Friday appeared to back claims by investors that Treasury's "net worth sweep" is illegal.