Podcasts about cfpb

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis examines signs that the CFPB is reactivating its supervisory and enforcement functions after a period of relative inactivity. The discussion notes reports that the CFPB plans to restart supervisory exams — likely remote, less burdensome, and focused on large banks — and raises questions about whether those exams will address debanking, despite the CFPB's limited jurisdiction over nonconsumer banking relationships. The conversation also underscores that some previously dormant enforcement investigations are being revived, indicating a return to a more active CFPB. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Jamal Abdoul and Adam Ruben discuss recent media coverage surrounding Zillow, focusing on an empirical study that alleges Zillow Home Loans has been charging higher mortgage rates than competing lenders between 2022 and 2024.1. The Study's FindingsA professor's regression analysis compared Zillow's mortgage pricing to other lenders, controlling for borrower demographics, loan characteristics, geography, and time period. The study—based on CFPB rate spread data—suggests Zillow loans have become relatively more expensive over time, with particular impact on lower-income borrowers. The hosts highlight concerns that these borrowers, who may already face more barriers to homeownership, could be disproportionately affected by higher loan costs.2. Zillow's Integrated Business ModelAdam and Jamal explain how Zillow operates as more than just a home search platform. Through integrated partnerships, agents participating in Zillow programs may have marketing agreements or financial incentives tied to Zillow-affiliated services, including Zillow Home Loans.While buyers are not required to use Zillow's lending arm, they are often encouraged to speak with a Zillow lender when touring homes through the platform. The hosts note that agents may receive higher commission splits or back-end incentives when clients use Zillow Home Loans, raising questions about conflicts of interest and whether consumers always receive neutral guidance.3. Consumer Awareness & TransparencyThe conversation emphasizes the importance of reading fine print. Zillow's advertised rates and monthly payment estimates often assume:20% down paymentsBest-case interest ratesPoints paid upfront to lower ratesWhile these practices are legal, the true cost may not be immediately clear to first-time or less-experienced buyers. The hosts stress the need for due diligence, comparison shopping, and working with trusted professionals to evaluate loan terms carefully.4. Broader Market ContextThe episode also touches on current market trends:Signs of a busier upcoming spring and summer marketIncreased seller concessions in some areasA significant year-over-year rise in refinance activity, as borrowers who bought at higher rates (7%+) look to lower their monthly paymentsKey Discussion Points:

Welcome back to the Fintech Takes podcast. I'm Alex Johnson, joined in this episode by two guests, Steve Boms (Executive Director at FDATA) and Dan Murphy (Founder of Sunset Park Advisors; formerly CFPB). We're talking about Canada, and why a country that has spent the better part of a decade moving at a pace I have occasionally made fun of in the newsletter is now arguably ahead of the U.S. on open banking regulation. Dan and Steve walk through how Canada deliberately corrected what other countries got wrong, and how timing and learning play a role, too. Canada watched the BPI lawsuit play out in the U.S. They saw the gap between banks' stated preferences and revealed preferences once implementation became real. They built voluminous, specific legislation partly because they learned what happens when you leave room for interpretation. The conversation explores the global policy learning ecosystem, the cultural conservatism baked into Canadian financial services (Steve calls it "conservatism with the lowercase c"), and how a Big Five oligopoly holding 90% of consumer deposits accidentally created conditions for comprehensive reform when external pressure finally arrived. Highlights include: Steve's argument that write access might actually solve liability problems by creating traceable ledgers of who changed what and when Dan's observation about the Amazon Perplexity lawsuit and how it echoes every open banking access fight  The distinction between domestic competition policy and international competitiveness policy, and why they usually point in opposite directions This episode is brought to you by Plaid.  Most lenders see the value of cash flow data. The hard part is getting started—and knowing what to do with it once you have it. Plaid makes it easy to access real-time cash flow and behavioral insights in seconds, through a familiar experience borrowers already trust. No heavy lift. No added friction. Learn more at www.plaid.com/ftt Sign up for Alex's Fintech Takes newsletter for the latest insightful analysis on fintech trends, along with a heaping pile of pop culture references and copious footnotes. Every Monday and Thursday: https://workweek.com/brand/fintech-takes/ And for more exclusive insider content, don't forget to check out my YouTube page. Follow Steve: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevenboms/ Follow Dan: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danieljmurphy01/ Follow Alex Johnson:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgfH47QEwbQmkQlz1V9rQA/videos LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexhjohnson X: https://www.twitter.com/AlexH_Johnson

Join two 25-year veterans representing the elder justice profession as they provide an overview of the troubling trends they have seen with the burgeoning problem of elder abuse. Their focus will be on financial exploitation—perpetrated by a broad spectrum of offenders, including strangers and people known to their older targets.  The presenters will also address key challenges and threats to the physical and financial safety of older people, including the proposed dismantling of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and its Office for Older Americans, along with other concerning issues at the federal, state and local level that are leaving thousands of older people at the mercy of financial predators. Topics will include financial grooming (a.k.a. “pig-butchering”), crypto scams, romance scams, and the growth of transnational crime rings that are targeting American seniors to the tune of billions in losses. About the Speakers Jenefer Duane is an elder justice advocate and consultant. Duane is a former senior program analyst in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) Office for Older Americans. With 40 years in aging services and consumer protection, she specializes in prevention, response, investigation, prosecution and resolution of cases of elder financial exploitation. At the CFPB, she led the development of the national Elder Financial Protection and Response Network program. She was the agency lead for the award-winning Money Smart for Older Adults program with the FDIC. She also led several CFPB-FinCin initiatives to strengthen the suspicious-activity reporting and investigation of elder financial exploitation.  Paul Greenwood is a former deputy district attorney and an AARP consultant. Greenwood headed up the Elder Abuse Prosecution Unit at the San Diego DA's Office for 22 years. In 1999 California Lawyer magazine named Paul as one of their top 20 lawyers of the year in recognition of his pioneering efforts to pursue justice on behalf of senior citizens. He has prosecuted more than 750 felony cases of physical, sexual, emotional and financial elder abuse. He has also prosecuted 10 murder cases, including one death penalty case. In March 2018 Greenwood retired from the San Diego DA's office to concentrate on sharing lessons learned from his elder abuse prosecutions with a wider audience. In October 2018 he was given a lifetime achievement award by his former office. Greenwood now spends much of his post retirement time speaking on behalf of AARP nationally, consulting on elder abuse cases, testifying as an expert witness and providing trainings to law enforcement and Adult Protective Services agencies across the country and internationally. He is also involved as the criminal justice board member of the National Adult Protective Services Association. A Grownups Member-led Forum program. Forums at the Club are organized and run by volunteer programmers who are members of The Commonwealth Club, and they cover a diverse range of topics. Learn more about our Forums. Organizer: Denise Michaud  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Friday February 20, 2026 Alexis Goldstein Fired by CFPB Now Running for Congress

On today's Consumer Finance Monitor podcast, we are releasing an episode about a timely and wide-ranging discussion on one of the most significant and fastest-evolving developments in commercial finance: the rapid "consumerization" of small business lending law. In this episode, host Alan Kaplinsky welcomes Louis Caditz-Peck, Executive Director of the Responsible Business Lending Coalition (RBLC), for an in-depth conversation about the proliferation of state small business lending protection statutes, the policy debates driving them, and what they mean for lenders, fintechs, banks, and small business borrowers. From Self-Regulation to State Law: How We Got Here For decades, commercial lending operated under a fundamentally different regulatory framework than consumer credit. The prevailing assumption was that business borrowers were sophisticated, negotiated their transactions, and did not need standardized disclosures or suitability-type protections. That assumption has eroded. As Louis explains, since the financial crisis, and particularly with the growth of online and fintech lending, small business financing has changed dramatically. Community banks have pulled back. Non-bank online platforms have expanded. New products, including merchant cash advances and other revenue-based financing arrangements, have proliferated. At the same time, concerns have grown about: Opaque pricing structures Misleading "interest rate" representations Broker incentives that steer borrowers into higher-cost products Repeated refinancing of unaffordable obligations These concerns led to the development of the Small Business Borrower's Bill of Rights, a set of industry standards first launched in 2015 at the Aspen Institute by a coalition of lenders, small business groups, and nonprofit advocates. What began as a voluntary, self-regulatory effort quickly became a blueprint for legislation. California's SB 1235 in 2018 marked the first major small business truth-in-lending law. Since then, according to Louis, 19 small business financial protection laws have been enacted across multiple states, with California and New York leading the way. The "Consumerization" of Small Business Lending A central theme of the episode is whether we are witnessing the "consumerization" of small business lending. Many of the new state laws borrow heavily from consumer credit concepts, including: APR-style cost disclosures Total cost of financing disclosures Payment schedule requirements Prepayment and fee transparency Restrictions on certain contractual provisions Some states have layered on licensing or registration requirements for small business finance providers. Others incorporate or supplement state UDAP (unfair and deceptive acts and practices) standards, which may apply to certain business-to-business transactions as well as consumer transactions. The policy rationale is straightforward: many "Main Street" businesses are effectively sole proprietorships or closely-held operations without in-house finance or legal teams. Legislators increasingly view these borrowers as closer to consumers than to large corporations with treasury departments and inside or outside counsel. As Alan and Louis discuss, the regulatory shift raises serious operational and compliance challenges, particularly given the state-by-state patchwork of requirements. The Compliance Conundrum: Patchwork and Harmonization A recurring concern is whether the proliferation of state laws imposes disproportionate burdens on smaller lenders and startups, especially compared to large institutions with robust legal and compliance infrastructures. Louis emphasizes that RBLC has actively worked to promote interstate harmonization, particularly between California and New York. For example: Advocating for standardized disclosure forms that can be used in multiple states Aligning definitions and disclosure triggers Encouraging estimated APR calculations for revenue-based financing However, not all states have followed a harmonized approach. Some laws, particularly those focused narrowly on merchant cash advances, have created divergent requirements, complicating multi-state compliance. As Alan notes, the trend presents both risk and opportunity for lenders and their counsel. The regulatory environment is no longer static. Companies offering small business financing must assume that: Cost disclosures will likely be required in more states Registration or licensing may apply Enforcement risk—particularly under state UDAP statutes—will increase Section 1071 and Federal Uncertainty The episode also explores the role of the CFPB under Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires data collection on small business lending to: 1.     Identify potential discrimination, and 2.     Assess whether certain markets are underserved. The CFPB finalized its 1071 rule in 2023 under then Director Rohit Chopra. Multiple legal challenges followed. Under the current administration, a notice of proposed rulemaking has sought to scale back and slow implementation. At the same time, the Federal Trade Commission has signaled an interest in using its enforcement authority to address unfair or deceptive acts or practices affecting small businesses—underscoring an intriguing tension within federal regulatory policy. As Louis observes, the debate is not simply about reducing or expanding government. It is about how government authority will be used and whether transparency and enforcement will be advanced through rulemaking, litigation, or state initiatives. Merchant Cash Advances and Revenue-Based Financing A particularly nuanced part of the discussion focuses on merchant cash advances (MCAs) and other sales-based financing products. These arrangements typically involve: An advance of funds in exchange for a fixed repayment amount Payments tied to a percentage of daily or periodic sales Variable duration depending on business performance RBLC's position, as Louis explains, is product neutral. The coalition does not advocate banning product categories or imposing rate caps. Instead, it focuses on responsible practices, including transparent pricing and assessment of ability to repay. Importantly, none of the major state lending protection laws impose interest rate caps. The emphasis is on disclosure and market transparency rather than price regulation. Who Is Covered—and Who Is Not? Most state small business truth-in-lending statutes apply to financing of $500,000 or less (with some variation, such as New York's $2.5 million threshold following gubernatorial revision). Coverage often includes: Closed-end loans Open-end lines of credit Sales-based financing/MCAs Factoring (in some states) Banks are generally exempt from these statutes, though non-bank "providers" presenting the offer of credit may still have disclosure obligations even in bank partnership models. As Alan highlights, this raises interesting competitive and policy questions about level playing fields across banks and non-banks. Looking Ahead to 2026 Both speakers agree: this trend is not going away. With significant percentages of small business owners reporting difficulty accessing affordable capital—and a substantial minority reporting harm from predatory practices—state legislators remain motivated to act. The key policy question is not whether regulation will expand, but how. Well-designed transparency frameworks can: Promote price competition Reward responsible innovation Improve borrower decision-making Poorly harmonized or overly rigid frameworks, however, risk increasing compliance costs and reducing credit availability. As Alan notes in his closing remarks, small business finance regulation is becoming a core area of growth for law firms and compliance professionals historically focused on consumer financial services. The line between consumer and commercial finance continues to blur.  Alan noted that the Consumer Financial Services Group which he founded and chaired for 25 years has counseled and represented small business lenders for decades. For lenders, fintechs, banks, and their advisors, understanding these developments is no longer optional—it is essential. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

Open banking in the United States has been on a long and winding road, and the journey is far from over. In this episode, I sit down with Steve Boms, Executive Director of FDATA North America, the trade association representing the fintech companies at the heart of the open banking ecosystem. Steve has been one of the most active voices in shaping U.S. open banking policy for over a decade, and he brings a uniquely informed perspective to where things stand today.We dig into the current state of the 1033 rule and what amendments are likely coming, FDATA's firm stance that banks should not be permitted to charge fees for consumer-directed data access, and the growing complexity created by a patchwork of state-level regulations on data privacy, AI, and fintech products. We close with a fascinating discussion on how agentic AI, with its need for clear consent frameworks, robust APIs, and defined liability rules, could become the next major catalyst that finally forces meaningful open banking progress in this country.In this podcast you will learn:The origin story of FDATA in the UK and how it came to the US.How Steve has been involved with CFPB and Section 1033 since 2015.Over the next 10+ years, how FDATA has been engaged in open banking policy.How open banking and open finance has evolved in the UK.Who their members are and what FDATA does for them.Where we are at today when it comes to the 1033 rule.The FDATA view on banks charging fees for access to their data.Why this is not really a bank versus fintech fight.Why it may be many years before we have a final rule for open banking.Why data access negotiations have been put on pause for now.What else Steve is working on beyond open banking.Why he is increasing concerned about the Balkanization of financial services regulation (see his recent Open Banker column).How they coordinate with the other fintech trade associations.How they think about the standardization of API and other data standards.Why Steve is optimistic about the future of open banking in the U.S.Why AI agents could be a catalyzing force for clear open banking rules.Connect with Fintech One-on-One: Tweet me @PeterRenton Connect with me on LinkedIn Find previous Fintech One-on-One episodes

Headlines for February 18, 2026; Jesse Jackson Fought for Justice at Home & Abroad: Juan González & Bishop William Barber; “Extremely Dangerous Situation”: Trita Parsi Warns U.S. & Iran Have Incentives to Escalate Conflict; CFPB Staffer Alexis Goldstein Fired for Confronting DOGE Members, Announces Run for Congress; Meet Analilia Mejía, Who Won NJ Congressional Primary After Speaking Out Against ICE & Genocide in Gaza

[The Sacramento Bee] Californians spend almost half their income on their mortgage.  [Housing Wire] Barry Habib, Logan Mohtashami say housing market set for pent-up demand surge. [Oregon Live] Impacted HECM borrowers may receive payouts from banned loan servicers as part of a CFPB settlement. Watch our video podcast here!

In the episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast we are releasing today, we examine what may be the most consequential development in New York consumer protection law in nearly half a century: the enactment of the New York State Fair Business Practices Act (the FAIR Act). Signed into law in December 2025 and taking effect on February 17, 2026, the FAIR Act represents the first comprehensive overhaul of New York General Business Law § 349 in almost 50 years. Long focused primarily on deceptive acts and practices, Section 349 has now been expanded to expressly prohibit unfair and abusive business practices as well—bringing New York law far closer to the federal UDAAP framework under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. To explore what changed, why it matters, and how the law will be enforced in practice, Alan Kaplinsky (founder and former leader of the Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr LLP and now Senior Counsel and host of Consumer Finance Monitor) is joined by two senior officials from the New York Attorney General's Bureau of Consumer Frauds and Protection who were directly involved in shaping and implementing the statute: ·        Jane Azia, Chief of the Bureau of Consumer Frauds and Protection ·        Alec Webley, Assistant Attorney General and one of the attorneys who helped shepherd the FAIR Act through the legislative process What followed was a wide-ranging and unusually candid discussion of the statute's origins, scope, enforcement implications, and practical lessons for businesses operating in, or affecting, New York. From Deception to Unfairness and Abusiveness For decades, New York's consumer protection regime lagged behind most other states and federal regulators by focusing almost exclusively on deception. As Jane Azia explained, deception alone often fails to capture conduct that is plainly harmful to consumers, particularly where disclosures technically exist but are obscured, consumers are subjected to high-pressure tactics, or businesses exploit significant informational or power asymmetries. The FAIR Act closes those gaps by expressly prohibiting: ·        Unfair practices, modeled closely on the FTC's longstanding unfairness framework ·        Abusive practices, drawing heavily on more than a decade of CFPB enforcement experience Importantly, while the statute borrows from federal concepts of unfairness and abusiveness, New York is not bound to follow future CFPB reinterpretations. As Alec Webley emphasized, the legislature carefully chose its language, expressly incorporating only certain federal elements (such as the FTC's "substantial injury" concept) while deliberately declining to tether New York law to future federal regulatory shifts. Broader Scope Than Federal Law One of the most significant differences between the FAIR Act and federal consumer protection law is scope. Jane Azia pointed out that unlike the federal Consumer Financial Protection Act, which applies primarily to financial services, the FAIR Act applies to all business activity occurring in, or affecting consumers in, New York. That means unfair or abusive conduct by non-financial businesses now squarely falls within the Attorney General's enforcement authority. The statute also avoids many of the preemption constraints that can limit state enforcement against national banks under federal law, because it is a law of general application rather than a banking regulation. No Rulemaking—But Clear Signals The FAIR Act does not grant the Attorney General rulemaking authority, and the AG's office does not currently plan to issue formal regulations or written guidance. Instead, businesses should expect the meaning of "unfair" and "abusive" to be fleshed out through enforcement actions, settlements, and existing federal precedent. That said, the Attorney General has already identified categories of conduct likely to draw scrutiny, including: ·        Steering borrowers into unnecessarily costly repayment options ·        High-pressure sales tactics ·        Obscured or misleading pricing ·        Exploitation of consumers with limited English proficiency ·        Misleading marketing in health care, auto sales, and emerging financial products Several examples discussed on the podcast, including enforcement actions involving e-cigarettes, earned wage access products, and savings account practices, illustrate how the AG's office has already been applying unfairness and abusiveness theories under existing authority, and how the FAIR Act now allows those claims to be brought directly under state law. Remedies and Enforcement Tools The FAIR Act does not dramatically alter the remedies available to the Attorney General, but it reinforces a powerful enforcement arsenal, including: ·        Injunctive relief ·        Restitution ·        Civil penalties ·        Disgorgement ·        Expedited "special proceedings" that can allow the AG to move quickly in court to halt unlawful conduct As a reminder, recent amendments to Article 22-a of the general business law also significantly increased civil penalties for violations of section 349 occurring during disasters or abnormal market disruptions, an issue businesses should not overlook. Extraterritorial Reach and Coordination with Other Regulators The discussion also addresses a recurring compliance question: when New York law applies beyond New York's borders. In general, the statute applies where conduct occurs in New York or where New York consumers are harmed. It can also apply to out-of-state consumers harmed by New York-based businesses. By contrast, purely out-of-state conduct with no meaningful New York nexus typically falls outside the statute's reach. The episode also explores how the Attorney General coordinates with: ·        Other state attorneys general in multi-state investigations, ·        The New York Department of Financial Services, ·        The New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection, and ·        Federal agencies such as the FTC. Even as federal consumer protection enforcement ebbs and flows, the states, and New York in particular, remain active and increasingly influential. Practical Takeaways for Businesses A central theme of the discussion was that the FAIR Act is not a reason to relax compliance efforts—quite the opposite. As Alec Webley noted, statutes like this create an opportunity for companies and their counsel to step back, reassess business practices, and ask hard questions: ·        Are consumers complaining about this practice? ·        Is it genuinely necessary to the business? ·        Does it obscure costs or risks? ·        Would the company be comfortable seeing it described on the front page of a major newspaper? Practices that may have survived under a narrow deception standard could now pose real enforcement risk under broader unfairness and abusiveness principles. Looking Ahead Both guests emphasize that the FAIR Act was drafted with care and restraint, and that early enforcement actions are likely to fall squarely within the statute's text and intent. At the same time, emerging technologies, particularly digital marketing, fine-print disclosures on mobile devices, and the use of AI, are clearly on the Attorney General's radar. The bottom line is clear: the FAIR Act marks a fundamental shift in New York consumer protection law. With its February 17, 2026 effective date now here, businesses operating in or affecting New York should be taking this development seriously by reviewing practices, strengthening compliance frameworks, and preparing for a more expansive and assertive enforcement environment. We will continue to track developments under the FAIR Act and report on key enforcement actions and interpretations as they unfold. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

Welcome to The Chrisman Commentary, your go-to daily mortgage news podcast, where industry insights meet expert analysis. Hosted by Robbie Chrisman, this podcast delivers the latest updates on mortgage rates, capital markets, and the forces shaping the housing finance landscape. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just looking to stay informed, you'll get clear, concise breakdowns of market trends and economic shifts that impact the mortgage world.In today's episode, we go through a couple mergers and acquisitions from around the mortgage industry, including an interview with Pennymac's Kevin Ryan on the company's acquisition of Cenlar. Plus, Robbie sits down with Kastle's Rishi Choudhary for a discussion on how AI agents are moving from hype to real impact in mortgage lending and servicing by automating unstructured, high-friction borrower interactions at scale, delivering measurable ROI through lower servicing costs, higher loan officer productivity, and production-proven deployments. And we close by looking at reaction to that very robust delayed January payrolls report.This week's podcasts are Sponsored by Cenlar. Cenlar supports lenders and investors with scalable, best-in-class loan servicing built for today's complex market. From compliance to customer experience, Cenlar helps portfolios perform better, borrowers stay supported, and servicers focus on growth. We're proud to partner with a true industry leader.

In this episode, IPA CEO Brian Tate joins host Ben Jackson to break down the association's newly released annual report and explore the major regulatory and industry developments shaping payments in 2026 — the IPA's 20th anniversary year.  From the future of the CFPB to the accelerating shift from checks to electronic payments, to the emerging regulatory frameworks for stablecoins and digital assets, this conversation maps the landscape that payments companies must navigate in the year ahead.  Key Topics Discussed  • The New Administration's Regulatory Posture  • The Ongoing Transition from Checks to Electronic Payments  • Third-Party Relationships & Digitalization  • Key Issues for IPA Members  • Looking Ahead to 2026  • 2026 Innovative Payments Conference Preview  Links & Resources  IPA Annual Report  IPA Membership Information   2026 Innovative Payments Conference (April 29–May 1, Washington, DC)   

Welcome back to the Fintech Takes podcast, where I'm welcoming back Jane Barratt, Chief Advocacy Officer at MX, to  talk about Super Bowl commercials and advertising ( and how it overlaps with data privacy, data ownership, open banking, and AI). Fun fact: Jane had a previous career in advertising. What I didn't know is that Jane used to go on live television and review ads from the Super Bowl the day after. In this episode, recorded the day after Super Bowl LIX (déjà vu vu for Jane), we hand out the inaugural Fintech Takes Super Bowl Ad Awards. Then we pivot to what the commercials (including those that were conspicuously absent) reveal about consumer sentiment, what happens when ads start showing up inside AI tools, and more. We also dig into where U.S. open banking stands after a year of regulatory turbulence around the CFPB's Section 1033 rule. Highlights include: Why Levi's won Best Use of Money and Coinbase won Biggest Waste of Money Why almost no major banks and fintech companies, or consumer financial brands showed up (and what that missing marketing spend signals about the economy) Why ads inside AI tools are fundamentally different from ads on Instagram or Google Why the biggest banks keep investing in open banking even with the CFPB's Section 1033 rule still unresolved, and why smaller banks that don't invest in data-sharing risk asset flight to trillion-dollar institutions This episode is brought to you by Plaid.  Plaid helps lenders approve more creditworthy borrowers without taking on more risk, combining real-time cash flow data with behavioral insights. It's a fast, familiar experience people trust, and that actually converts. Learn more at www.plaid.com/ftt Sign up for Alex's Fintech Takes newsletter for the latest insightful analysis on fintech trends, along with a heaping pile of pop culture references and copious footnotes. Every Monday and Thursday: https://workweek.com/brand/fintech-takes/ And for more exclusive insider content, don't forget to check out my YouTube page. Follow Jane: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/janebarratt/   Follow Alex Johnson:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgfH47QEwbQmkQlz1V9rQA/videos LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexhjohnsonX: https://www.twitter.com/AlexH_Johnson

Welcome to Collections Conversations, a new four-part podcast miniseries from Fintech Takes, sponsored by our friends at C&R Software. The series digs into how generative AI is reshaping debt collections; what it enables, what it complicates, and why it might finally force the industry to retire the word “collections” altogether. In Episode 3, I sit down with John McNamara, Chief Growth Officer at Avtal. John's career spans the private sector and the CFPB, where he worked on Regulation F, dragging debt collection out of an era when the law literally referenced telegrams. That makes him perfect for unpacking the biggest misconception industry has about regulators, dubious credit repair organizations, and AI fluffery.  We start inside the CFPB itself. John explains what industry constantly got wrong: they didn't understand the voices shaping policy. His benchmark for whether a rule landed? A symmetry of outrage and vitriol. If both sides are pissed, that's probably right. From there, we dig into what John calls the credit reporting mess — why the credit reporting system creates inaccurate data, and how credit repair organizations exploit that through endless dispute loops Plus, John's first principles when it comes to AI: data governance and permissible purpose matter more than models, and better digital engagement usually beats new forms of automation (if someone's on your payment portal, they don't want to talk to you). Subscribe now to catch what's next. This episode is brought to you by C&R Software.  More than just debt collection, C&R sets the global standard for AI-native, humanized credit management. They simplify the complex with end-to-end credit-risk lifecycle support, powered by automated workflows, AI-native intelligence, and real-time, data-driven decisioning. Learn more at https://hubs.ly/Q03Wl1DY0. Sign up for Alex's Fintech Takes newsletter for the latest insightful analysis on fintech trends, along with a heaping pile of pop culture references and copious footnotes. Every Monday and Thursday: https://workweek.com/brand/fintech-takes/ And for more exclusive insider content, don't forget to check out my YouTube page. Follow Alex:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgfH47QEwbQmkQlz1V9rQA/videos LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexhjohnson Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/AlexH_Johnson Follow John: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-mcnamara-75a2982/ Learn more about C&R Software here: https://hubs.ly/Q03Wl1DY0

Who controls your financial data and who decides how it can be used? As Americans increasingly rely on digital banking, apps, and financial technology tools, that question has moved to the forefront of a policy debate that may come to a head in the coming months.Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act is currently under review by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, prompting renewed debate over how consumers should access their own financial information and decide how it is shared. Translating that principle into practice, raises significant legal and policy questions about whether current regulatory and market structures truly empower consumers or instead concentrate control over data into the hands of banksThis webinar will examine open banking through a consumer-centered legal lens, focusing on how rules governing data access, privacy, and consent impact real-world choice. Panelists will discuss how bank-centric approaches may prioritize institutional preferences over consumer autonomy, potentially limiting Americans’ ability to use innovative financial tools that rely on secure, authorized data sharing.Throughout the program, panelists will evaluate the CFPB’s Section 1033 rulemaking and consider whether a consumer-directed approach to financial data can both defend consumer’s right to their own data and foster innovation.Featuring:Paul Watkins, Managing Partner, Fusion Law PLLCProf. Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University(Moderator) Will Hild, Executive Director, Consumers Research

Welcome to The Chrisman Commentary, your go-to daily mortgage news podcast, where industry insights meet expert analysis. Hosted by Robbie Chrisman, this podcast delivers the latest updates on mortgage rates, capital markets, and the forces shaping the housing finance landscape. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just looking to stay informed, you'll get clear, concise breakdowns of market trends and economic shifts that impact the mortgage world.In today's episode, we go through the latest update from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Plus, Robbie sits down with Curinos' Ken Flaherty, Josh Beane, and Rich Martin for a discussion on key 2025 performance trends across first mortgage, home equity, and unsecured lending, as well as 2026 forecasts and assumptions for each vertical, and the strategic priorities lenders should focus on to grow profitably in the year ahead. And we close by talking about why we've seen a drop in mortgage applications.Thank you to Truework, the one verification solution to replace in-house waterfalls. Verify any borrower with a VOIE solution that automates the entire process to quickly deliver the most accurate and complete reports with broad GSE coverage.

In this episode, we speak with Tyler Creighton about the ongoing struggle to save the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from defunding and closure at the hands of Russell Vought in the second Trump Administration. Creighton is a lawyer at the CFPB and a member of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), Chapter 335. Before joining the CFPB, Creighton clerked for the Massachusetts Appeals Court and, prior to that, he was an organizer for pro-democracy reforms at Common Cause and ReThink Media. We talk with Creighton about life at the CFPB under the leadership of Vought, central architect of the notorious Project 2025 document and avowed opponent of the agency he now directs. During our conversation, Creighton details how, in spite of Vought's attempts to defund and close the agency, the CFPB continues to survive. In Creighton's telling, the agency's endurance owes in no small part to the continuous labor actions undertaken by the NTEU and its members. In February 2025, for example, the union sued the Trump Administration, securing an injunction against Vought's efforts to close the agency. (Read the judge's extraordinary Memorandum Opinion here.) Then, in late December, a federal district court judge ruled that the Trump administration must continue to fund the CFPB through the Federal Reserve, contradicting Vought's absurd claim that the CFPB can no longer seek financing from the Fed because the nation's Central Bank is operating at a loss.Despite the NTEU's string of successes, the fate of the CFPB still remains to be determined. The good news, however, is that there are ways that you can support the bureau as it rounds into its second year of the second Trump Administration. Learn more about the fight to save the CFPB from the CFPB Union website. Follow and share news from the NTEU account on Bluesky. Join the union's public demonstrations, if you live near or find yourself visiting Washington D.C. You can also help fund the NTEU's activities by purchasing any number of cheeky items in their online merchandise shop. Visit our Patreon page here: https://www.patreon.com/MoLsuperstructureMusic by Nahneen Kula: www.nahneenkula.com

This episode provides a high-level recap of the major regulatory compliance themes covered in 2025. Dean highlights intense regulatory volatility, especially around CRA and Section 1071, including rule freezes, proposed repeals, litigation, delayed compliance dates, and the CFPB's move toward an interim final rule for small-business lending data collection. The discussion also revisits key fair lending, redlining, and data-analysis topics, along with rising operational risks such as BSA/AML/KYC modernization, third-party risk management, and expanding concerns around AI, data governance, cybersecurity, and privacy. Consumer protection issues featured prominently, particularly Regulation E error-resolution failures, elder financial exploitation, and recurring flood compliance violations. The takeaway for compliance and risk officers: conduct a CMS health check, document lessons learned from 2025, and proactively brief senior management and the board with a clear 2026 risk and compliance plan focused on these evolving priorities. Brought to you by GeoDataVision and M&M Consulting

A coalition of 22 Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in federal court against CFPB Acting Director Russell Vought and the Federal Reserve Board, alleging that the refusal to request statutorily required funding and to maintain key consumer complaint and mortgage data systems unlawfully interrupts state access to critical tools used in investigations and enforcement. The complaint asserts multiple violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and separation-of-powers principles, and highlights how states rely on CFPB resources like the Consumer Response System and Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data to pursue discrimination and consumer protection cases. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Paul L. Singer, Beth Bolen Chun, Abigail Stempson, Andrea deLorimier.

Find a bank that pays more, charges less, and keeps your money safe as rates adjust in 2026. How do you choose the best bank when savings rates are falling and fees won't quit? Hosts Sean Pyles and Elizabeth Ayoola discuss wealth inequality and retirement security to help you think bigger about what's “normal” in personal finance. They begin with a rapid-fire hot takes segment, with their perspectives on how money and power shape everyday life, why the decline of pensions shifts retirement risk onto workers, and questions worth asking about what a fairer safety net could look like. Then, banking Nerd Chanelle Bessette joins Sean and Elizabeth to discuss banking in 2026. They go over how to compare high-yield savings accounts as APYs drop, how to avoid common bank fees (like overdraft and ATM charges), and how to weigh digital-only banks versus brick-and-mortar options. They also cover how AI is changing customer service and fraud, why reduced consumer protections can raise the stakes for shoppers, and which banks topped NerdWallet's Best-of Awards in key categories. Our Nerds researched more than 250 banking products, narrowing down to just one winner per category: https://www.nerdwallet.com/l/awards-banking-2026?utm_source=sm&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=cm_organic_011926_podcast_sm_desc_allepisodes_best-of-banking  See all the winners of NerdWallet's Best-Of Awards: https://www.nerdwallet.com/l/awards?utm_source=sm&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=cm_organic_011926_podcast_sm_desc_allepisodes_best-of-awards  Want us to review your budget? Fill out this form — completely anonymously if you want — and we might feature your budget in a future segment! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScK53yAufsc4v5UpghhVfxtk2MoyooHzlSIRBnRxUPl3hKBig/viewform?usp=header In their conversation, the Nerds discuss: high-yield savings account, best high-yield savings account, savings account interest rates, APY, online banks, best online banks, bank fees, overdraft fees, avoid overdraft fees, ATM fees, ATM fee reimbursement, Allpoint ATM network, MoneyPass ATM network, no-fee checking account, monthly maintenance fee, bank bonuses, certificate of deposit, CD rates, best CD rates, Marcus by Goldman Sachs, SoFi bank, Newtek Bank, best bank 2026, early direct deposit, two-day early direct deposit, savings buckets, savings goal buckets, Zelle transfer limit, bill pay checks, cash deposits at ATMs, fraud protection, bank fraud scams, AI in banking, banking chatbots, customer service chat, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, CFPB complaints, CFPB settlements, credit unions vs banks, pension plan, defined benefit plan, and 401(k) vs pension. To send the Nerds your money questions, call or text the Nerd hotline at 901-730-6373 or email podcast@nerdwallet.com. Like what you hear? Please leave us a review and tell a friend. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Imagine a blueprint for remaking America's government from the ground up, drawn by conservative architects at the Heritage Foundation. That's Project 2025, launched in April 2023 as the 900-page Mandate for Leadership, a detailed roadmap to consolidate executive power and install loyalists across federal agencies, according to the Heritage Foundation's own documentation.Its stated goal? Reshape the sprawling administrative state into a leaner machine aligned with right-wing priorities. Picture Day One of a new Republican presidency: a stack of executive orders ready to sign, firing tens of thousands of civil servants under the revived Schedule F category, reclassifying them as at-will political appointees. The Heritage Foundation's plan calls for replacing them with vetted personnel from its database, aiming for 20,000 recruits by late 2024. As Government Executive reports, by early 2025, the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, accelerated this—slashing diversity offices, issuing reduction-in-force plans for 70,000 jobs, and targeting agencies like USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which returned $21 billion to scam victims but now faces elimination.Concrete changes abound. The blueprint urges dismantling the Department of Education, shifting programs like those for disabled students to Health and Human Services and curbing federal civil rights enforcement in schools to prioritize “student safety over racial parity in discipline,” per Mandate for Leadership. It eyes abolishing the Department of Homeland Security, merging its immigration functions, and partisan control of the DOJ and FBI, making their leaders directly accountable to the president. Cuts loom for Medicaid via funding caps and work requirements, plus shrinking the NIH and reversing Biden-era environmental rules to boost nuclear energy and corporate tax breaks.Experts warn of risks. The ACLU describes it as a “radical restructuring” threatening reproductive, LGBTQ, and immigrant rights. Unions like AFGE decry the potential loss of up to a million federal workers' protections, echoing fears of politicized governance.By mid-2025, courts have reinstated some fired staff at Voice of America and CFPB, signaling legal battles ahead. As return-to-office mandates clash with office closures, the project's ambition tests America's checks and balances.Looking forward, key milestones like congressional action on Education cuts and union fights could define 2026 governance. Will efficiency triumph or chaos ensue?Thank you for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Friday January 9, 2026 Raskin and Waters Demand Answers on Trump Crippling of CFPB

Join Our FREE Start Repairing Credit Challenge: http://startrepairingcredit.com/What if I told you that there is a credit repair shortcut that people are teaching, but using it could get you fined, sued, arrested, or even thrown in prison?I'm talking about people filing fake identity theft reports with the FDC, the CFPB, or the police because someone told them that it's a loophole, a magic trick, or a fast way to wipe their credit clean. Some people call it a credit sweep. Others just think that they found a secret loophole that no one else knows about. But here's the truth: it's a felony, and people are getting caught. Today, I'm going to show you exactly why fake identity theft claims can destroy your business, ruin your life, and get you locked up, even if you didn't mean to break the law. So you better stick around!P.S. Join the #1 event to grow your credit repair business: http://creditrepairexpo.com/Key Takeaways:00:00 This Credit “Hack” Could Land You In Prison02:49 Federal Regulations and Penalties for False Claims04:32 Real Cases05:01 Legal Credit Repair Changes Lives05:39 Outro06:48 Credit Repair ExpoAdditional Resources:Get a free trial to Credit Repair CloudGet my free credit repair training  5 Proven Steps to Remove Charge-Offs and Rebuild Your Credit FASTMake sure to subscribe so you stay up to date with our latest episodes.

The Somali grift might be the biggest financial scandal in American history, will the Mullahs finally fall? CFPB gets a lifeline from a corrupt judge, Brigitte Bardot…RIP, and more!

This Day in Legal History: Fundamental Laws of 1906On December 30, 1905, Tsar Nicholas II signed the “Fundamental Laws of 1906,” marking a pivotal moment in the Russian Empire's struggle between autocracy and constitutionalism. This act came in response to the Revolution of 1905, a period of mass unrest fueled by political repression, economic hardship, and a humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese War. The October Manifesto, issued two months earlier, had promised the establishment of a legislative Duma and the expansion of civil liberties. However, the Fundamental Laws, signed in December, revealed the Tsar's intention to retain ultimate authority despite these concessions.The document laid out a framework for governance, establishing a bicameral legislature with the Duma as its lower house, but Article 4 made clear that “the All-Russian Emperor possesses the supreme autocratic power.” This meant that, legally, any legislative progress remained subordinate to the Tsar's will. The laws also granted the Tsar control over the military, foreign policy, and the ability to dissolve the Duma at his discretion.While the Fundamental Laws introduced formal legal structures and acknowledged the existence of limited civil rights, they were largely symbolic gestures rather than meaningful reforms. Instead of curbing autocratic rule, the laws codified it, cloaking absolute monarchy in the appearance of legality. This duality deepened public dissatisfaction and political fragmentation.Rather than stabilizing the empire, the signing of the Fundamental Laws sowed further distrust in the regime and highlighted the Tsar's unwillingness to relinquish power. These contradictions contributed to the failure of the Duma system and fueled revolutionary momentum that would ultimately culminate in the revolutions of 1917.The Trump administration reached an agreement to review certain NIH grant applications that had been stalled or rejected amid a broader legal challenge over cuts to diversity-related research funding. The agreement followed a federal court ruling in Boston that found the NIH acted unlawfully when it canceled grants based on their perceived ties to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Though the Supreme Court later paused part of that ruling and shifted some aspects of the litigation to a court specializing in monetary claims, the review process for future NIH funding remained in legal limbo.Under the new agreement, the NIH will re-evaluate previously frozen or withdrawn grant applications, though it is not required to fund any specific proposals. Plaintiffs in the case, including researchers and several Democratic-led states, argued that the impacted studies—focusing on topics like HIV prevention, LGBTQ health, Alzheimer's, and sexual violence—serve vital public health needs.One of the plaintiffs, University of New Mexico postdoctoral researcher Nikki Maphis, said the agreement allows important scientific work to resume after what she described as an “arbitrary and destructive freeze.” The underlying NIH policy change, which cut funding for projects deemed to reflect ideological rather than scientific priorities, remains contested. A prior ruling blocking the policy is still under appeal by the Department of Health and Human Services.Trump administration agrees to review stalled NIH research grants after lawsuit | ReutersThe Trump administration's aggressive defunding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has pushed the agency to the brink of collapse, jeopardizing one of the few federal institutions explicitly designed to protect everyday Americans from financial harm. Created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, the CFPB has long served as a crucial recourse for people facing predatory lending, credit reporting errors, identity theft, and financial discrimination. The agency has helped return more than $21 billion to consumers since its founding. And yet, under President Trump's second term, it's being systematically dismantled—through funding cuts, legal challenges, and staffing reductions—with the administration openly declaring its intent to shut the agency down.In the absence of the CFPB, those wronged by financial institutions—like Bianca Jones, who battled a credit reporting error that nearly cost her a home, or Morgan Smith, who turned to the agency after being targeted by identity theft—may find themselves with nowhere to turn. The administration claims the CFPB promotes a political agenda, but the result is fewer protections for those already vulnerable. Rules around medical debt, overdraft fees, credit card terms, and mortgage lending have been gutted. Investigations have been shelved. Enforcement is evaporating.Critics argue that other regulators can fill the gap, but the CFPB was created because no one else was doing the job. Without it, financial institutions are more likely to abuse their power with impunity.You should ask yourself: who benefits when a consumer watchdog is taken offline? Because it certainly isn't the teachers, the single parents, the sick, or the struggling borrowers trying to make sense of a system stacked against them. It's the companies who'd rather not answer for what they do in the dark.Trump's funding cuts put America's consumer watchdog on the brink of collapse | ReutersA federal appeals court ruled that it cannot hear Amazon's constitutional challenge to the structure of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), deepening a circuit split on the issue and increasing the likelihood of U.S. Supreme Court review. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Amazon's case stemmed from a labor dispute and was therefore barred by the Norris-LaGuardia Act, which prohibits courts from intervening in active labor disputes. Amazon had filed the lawsuit to halt an NLRB case claiming it was a joint employer of unionized drivers working for a subcontractor and therefore obligated to bargain with their union.Amazon's broader claim—that the NLRB's structure is unconstitutional because its board members and judges are protected from at-will removal—has gained traction elsewhere. The 5th Circuit, in a recent case involving Elon Musk's SpaceX, ruled that such protections are unlawful and allowed a similar challenge to proceed. But the 9th Circuit firmly disagreed, emphasizing that courts should not interfere with labor board proceedings, regardless of the constitutional claims involved.This ruling aligns with a 3rd Circuit decision and stands in direct conflict with the 5th Circuit, setting the stage for a high-stakes resolution by the Supreme Court. Importantly, the 9th Circuit's ruling doesn't completely shut the door on such challenges—employers can still raise constitutional objections in NLRB proceedings and appeal after the fact. But for now, Amazon and other companies must make their case through the channels Congress established for resolving labor disputes.US court says it can't hear Amazon's NLRB challenge, deepening circuit split | ReutersA Utah judge has granted the release of most of the transcript and audio from a closed hearing in the high-profile case involving the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The hearing, held in October, addressed courtroom safety measures for the accused, Tyler Robinson, who is charged with aggravated murder and other serious offenses. Prosecutors allege Robinson fired a single fatal shot from a rooftop during a university event where Kirk was speaking, and they intend to seek the death penalty.Judge Tony Graf ruled that only about one page of the 80-page transcript would remain redacted, primarily for safety and security reasons. He also clarified that media organizations do not need special legal status to cover the proceedings, rejecting a request that would have guaranteed them advance notice of any future attempts to close hearings.Graf has already decided that Robinson can appear in civilian clothing but must remain physically restrained in court. However, media outlets are prohibited from photographing or filming his restraints, as defense attorneys argued such images could bias potential jurors. A hearing set for February will address whether cameras will be allowed in the courtroom at all.Kirk's death, which occurred during a campus debate, triggered widespread condemnation of political violence from across the ideological spectrum.Judge grants release of redacted transcript of Charlie Kirk case hearing | ReutersAs 2025 winds down, my Bloomberg column this week is a year-end piece reflecting not just on what was written, but on which ideas still resonate because the problems they address remain unresolved. The lasting relevance of several pieces underscores how little has shifted in tax and policy debates. A July column urging states to break free from federal tax volatility feels even more urgent now, as states still cling to unstable baselines. Early in the year, hopes that efficiency rhetoric (read: DOGE) might close the tax gap faded, with political discomfort around auditing the wealthy preventing any meaningful change. April's look at the step-up in basis revealed how death, not borrowing, remains the biggest capital gains loophole—and one Congress left untouched in the 2025 tax law. A May column on IRS immigration enforcement gains new resonance as the crackdown deepens, pushing some immigrant workers further from voluntary compliance. And October's piece on Pung v. Isabella County remains live, with the Supreme Court set to decide whether fairness in tax foreclosures means market value or simply what the government collects.Each of these columns anticipated weather patterns we're now standing in—proof less of foresight and more of inertia. If 2026 brings more engagement, even without clear solutions, there's hope that next year's retrospective won't feel like a reprint with new dates.Read the 5 Most Relevant Technically Speaking Columns of 2025 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

[Housing Wire] NRMLA responds to the CFPB's proposed changes to Reg B that would substantially impact the HECM program. [News Break] Here's when Dave Ramsey recommends taking Social Security benefits as early as possible. [JP Morgan Asset Management] JP Morgan's analysis reveals the true impacts credit card debt has on retirement savings and preparedness. Watch our video podcast here!

Thursday December 25, 2025 Lawsuit Over Vought's Attempt to Starve CFPB by Russell Mokhiber

Pre-show: Christmas-slideshow time Follow-up: Paris Buttfield-Addison’s locked Apple ID

Today's episode features Part 2 of our November 4 webinar, "The CFPB's Most Ambitious Regulatory Agenda Ever."  (Part 1 of this series was released on December 18. We encourage you to listen to that episode as well). In Part 2, we continue to unpack the far-reaching implications of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) regulatory ambitions. The CFPB has published a sweeping agenda that promises to reshape the landscape for consumer financial services, and our panel of seasoned attorneys offers vital context and actionable insights for industry professionals, regulators, and informed consumers alike.   Key Topics Discussed:  ·        CFPB's Pre-Rule and Long-Term Actions - What's on the regulatory horizon, including advance notices and rulemaking targets that could reshape consumer finance. ·        Clarifying "Unfair, Deceptive, and Abusive" Practices - Will the CFPB issue new rules or guidance to define these critical terms? The panel reviews statutory definitions and industry implications. ·        Identity Theft and Coerced Debt Regulation - Proposed amendments to Regulation V including new protections for survivors of identity theft and economic abuse. ·        Redefining Large Market Participants - Examination of thresholds for CFPB supervision in areas like auto financing, debt collection, consumer reporting, and international money transfers, aiming to target the largest market players. ·        Qualified Mortgage Rules & Loan Originator Compensation - What changes might be coming to mortgage rules and compensation methods, especially for small-dollar loans? The industry's wishlist and regulatory challenges are explored. ·        The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) & Disparate Impact - Is the CFPB shifting its stance on disparate impact liability in lending? Hear the latest on the Trump administration's influence and evolving regulatory language. ·        CFPB's Withdrawal of Guidance Documents- A look at the Bureau's move away from guidance towards formal rulemaking and the impact on regulated entities. ·        Industry Feedback and Uncertainty - Lively discussion about compliance burdens, regulatory rescissions, and the ongoing uncertainty surrounding the CFPB's future funding and priorities. Meet Your Speakers from Ballard Spahr:   ·        Alan Kaplinsky (Host & Moderator): Senior Counsel and Founder and former leader of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group  ·        Rich Andreano, Jr.: Partner and head of the firm's Mortgage Banking Group  ·        John Culhane, Jr.: Partner in the Consumer Financial Services Group  ·        Kristen Larson: Of Counsel, Consumer Financial Services Group   ·        Daniel Wilkinson: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group   ·        Rob Lieber: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group   ·        Aja Finger: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group   Tune in as our expert panel breaks down the complexities, anticipated impacts, and the road ahead under the CFPB's ambitious agenda. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

This Day in Legal History: Federal Reserve ActOn December 23, 1913, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law, creating the Federal Reserve System, the central banking system of the United States. The law was the culmination of decades of debate over banking reform, intensified by the financial panic of 1907. The Act aimed to provide the country with a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system. It established twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks overseen by a central Board in Washington, D.C., striking a balance between public oversight and private banking interests.The Federal Reserve was given key powers, including the ability to issue Federal Reserve Notes (now the dominant form of U.S. currency), regulate banks, and serve as a lender of last resort during financial crises. This marked a significant shift from the fragmented and largely unregulated banking environment of the 19th century.Critics feared it concentrated too much financial power in the hands of a few, while supporters believed it brought necessary structure and national oversight. Over the decades, the Fed's role expanded, especially during the Great Depression, World War II, and more recently the 2008 financial crisis and COVID-19 pandemic. The creation of the Fed also represented a broader legal evolution in how the federal government engaged with economic policy.A coalition of 21 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia has filed a lawsuit in federal court in Oregon to prevent the Trump administration from defunding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The states argue that the administration's decision to stop requesting funds from the Federal Reserve is unlawful and undermines Congress's constitutional authority. Since returning to office in January, President Trump has taken steps to dismantle the CFPB, including appointing his budget director, Russell Vought, as acting head and halting most agency operations.The CFPB was created in 2011 to safeguard consumers in the financial sector and has recovered over $21 billion for Americans. It is uniquely funded directly by the Federal Reserve rather than through Congressional appropriations. The administration claims the Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFPB's funding to come from the Fed's combined earnings, which they argue are unavailable due to the Fed operating at a loss since 2022.The lawsuit highlights that the CFPB is legally required to process consumer complaints from states, and without funding, it cannot fulfill this duty. Plaintiffs also contend that the administration's move violates the separation of powers by interfering with a congressionally established funding mechanism. Additional lawsuits from a federal employee union and nonprofits are pending in other courts, also seeking to compel the agency to resume funding requests.Democratic-led states sue to block US consumer watchdog's defunding under Trump | ReutersA new push by the Trump administration to challenge corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) faces steep legal hurdles. Under EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas, the agency is shifting toward what she calls a more “conservative view of civil rights,” focusing on potential discrimination against white men. Lucas has announced plans to investigate corporate DEI policies and pursue enforcement where race- or sex-based decisions are suspected.However, legal experts emphasize that proving such claims is difficult. Discrimination cases require clear evidence that someone was denied a job or benefit specifically because of their race or sex, not just because they were part of a changing applicant pool. Critics argue that the administration's narrative misunderstands the legal and practical realities of workplace diversity, which is often designed to prevent discrimination, not perpetuate it.Despite aggressive executive orders targeting DEI, many companies are maintaining or quietly adjusting their programs to remain compliant. Legal audits and program rebranding are common, especially in industries like automotive. DEI advocates point out that the business case for inclusion remains strong, as companies see diverse teams as essential to long-term success.Ultimately, while the administration's rhetoric may galvanize parts of its base, experts say turning that rhetoric into enforceable legal action will be difficult under existing anti-discrimination laws.Trump's anti-corporate DEI campaign faces high legal hurdles | ReutersMercedes-Benz has agreed to pay $120 million to settle environmental and consumer protection claims brought by multiple U.S. states over its use of emissions-cheating software in certain diesel vehicles. The settlement resolves the remaining U.S. legal actions tied to the broader Dieselgate scandal, which has affected several automakers. The claims focused on Mercedes' BlueTEC diesel models, which were previously marketed as especially clean and advanced.As part of the agreement, Mercedes will continue retrofitting affected vehicles with approved emissions software. These additional updates are expected to cost the company tens of millions more. However, the company stated that its financial results won't be impacted, as it had already set aside sufficient funds to cover the settlement and associated costs.Mercedes reaches $120 million settlement with US states over emissions scandal | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg this week, I argue that the IRS has a rare opportunity to repair its deeply flawed Voluntary Disclosure Program (VDP), which has become so punitive and complex that it actively discourages taxpayers from coming forward. While the program is supposed to help bring people back into compliance, its current structure demands that taxpayers essentially confess to wrongdoing—sometimes criminal—in a sworn statement, without any assurance the IRS will even consider their disclosure.Recent proposed reforms introduce a more structured penalty system and eliminate the notorious “willfulness checkbox” from Form 14457, a small but significant change that previously forced taxpayers to admit to criminal conduct just to apply. Still, the process remains risky. The IRS continues to require extensive narratives of past noncompliance, and for taxpayers with crypto assets, the demands are even greater: wallet addresses, transaction hashes, and mixer use must all be disclosed upfront. That level of technical and legal exposure could deter even well-meaning taxpayers.I argue the IRS must go further. It should offer flexible payment options—like installment agreements or offers in compromise—and abandon its rigid “pay-in-full” approach. It should also adopt a tiered penalty framework that accounts for intent, scale, and the evolving complexity of assets like cryptocurrency. Finally, the IRS needs to delay the most invasive digital asset reporting until after a taxpayer has been preliminarily accepted into the program, rather than forcing exhaustive disclosures at the outset.Without deeper changes, the VDP risks continuing as a trapdoor rather than a lifeline—one that punishes honesty and rewards silence. The current moment of public review is the best chance to realign the program with its original purpose: restoring compliance, not burying it.The IRS Has a Chance to Fix Its Voluntary Disclosure Program This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger Picture The [CB] is losing control of the economy, they wanted a crash instead Trump has turned it around and the economy is growing very quickly. The D’s are trying to convince the people that the economy is worse than what Trump is letting on, this will fail.Watch gold, silver and Bitcoin. The [DS] tried to gain control the military by having the seditious 6 tell the military not to obey, Trump gives them a dividend check to show he cares about them. The Epstein files were released, it all points to the Clinton’s and the D’s. The entire plan backfired on the [DS], boomerang. Every step of the way they are feeling the pain. The [DS] wants war and Trump is fighting against those countries who are suppose to be our allies. He will get peace in the end. Economy (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent BODIES Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren with a Devastating Reminder After She Claims Trump is Setting the Stage for the Next Economic Crash  Senator Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren (D-MA) made a poor decision trying to school Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent earlier this week, and it spectacularly backfired. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/2000915011154112623?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2000915011154112623%7Ctwgr%5E4c8d9bec902c32b0cd01ee05619255f6315a3493%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Ftreasury-secretary-scott-bessent-bodies-elizabeth-pocahontas-warren%2F  substantial increase in private credit which is outside of the regulated banking system — that tells me that the regulated system is too constrained.” https://twitter.com/SenWarren/status/2001375798947885283?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2001375798947885283%7Ctwgr%5E4c8d9bec902c32b0cd01ee05619255f6315a3493%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Ftreasury-secretary-scott-bessent-bodies-elizabeth-pocahontas-warren%2F https://twitter.com/SecScottBessent/status/2002138930410324028?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2002138930410324028%7Ctwgr%5E4c8d9bec902c32b0cd01ee05619255f6315a3493%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Ftreasury-secretary-scott-bessent-bodies-elizabeth-pocahontas-warren%2F  Administration. Over-regulation is not the solution to what ails the American banking system. Rigorous, responsible supervision is. The initial report on the 2023 debacle by former Vice Chairman for Supervision, Michael Barr, was an exercise in obfuscation and sophistry. The American people deserve supervisors who are not asleep at the wheel, and the incoming Chairman of the Federal Reserve should undertake a thorough investigation of the systemic and oversight failures that led to that disaster. Source: thegaetwaypundit.com Trump announces that they've sold $1.3 BILLION worth of Gold Cards within Days Political/Rights https://twitter.com/RepJamesComer/status/2002011743254380602?s=20 More than a dozen politically exposed people and government officials’ names appear in the hundreds of thousands of pages of Jeffrey Epstein files made public Friday, sources said. And Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ discovered more than 1,200 victims and their families during the exhaustive review, explaining the process behind determining which files could be released in a letter to Congress exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital. https://twitter.com/Badhombre/status/2002388917618610413?s=20   home in New York to solicit money for her campaign and the DCCC. FBI was warned that Jeffrey Epstein was into child porn — but ignored it for 10 years, docs show   A former employee of late sex predator Jeffrey Epstein alerted the FBI that he was interested in “child pornography” and that he threatened to “burn her house down” decades before Epstein became an international fixation — but feds apparently did nothing. Source: nypost.com   If there was every anything about Trump, it would have been released before he reached the bottom of the escalator in 2015, the Comey FBI would have leaked it, and the Dems would have brought it up at some point while Biden was in office. But none of that happened. Why? Because Epstein leads to the Dems, and people like myself have been trying to warn the world about it for 10+ years.  https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2002408563193368834?s=20  and it worked brilliantly. Could you imagine if in Trump's first term he released all this stuff about Epstein? The public would not have believed it, and the Dems/MSM would have claimed it was all politically motivated and fabricated by Trump. The only way this Epstein disclosure was going to work, was to get the public to beg for it. So that's what Trump did. https://twitter.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/2002450017647301084?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2002530633394934144?s=20   partner with Wolfe via the TerraMar project, which is also connected to the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation. What is Nathan Wolfe known for? Searching for bat coronaviruses in Ukraine via USAID Project PREDICT, via his biolab company, Metabiota, which was funded via Rosemont Seneca, which is partially owned by Hunter Biden. Russia accused Wolfe and his biolab company of creating genome-specific biological weapons in Ukraine. This situation has been addressed by RFK Jr. and Tulsi multiple times, and has been a major topic at the UN for over 3 years now. So Epstein had an interest in eugenics and he had financial/social connections to virologists who were making genome-specific biological weapons via USAID grants in Ukraine. Nathan Wolfe even directly thanked Epstein in his 2011 book “The Viral Storm: The Dawn of the New Pandemic Age” where Wolfe predicted the COVID pandemic 8 years before it happened… So what am I getting at? I think Epstein had plans to engage in ethnic cleansing/population control/genocide via biological weapon, and I think he had something to do with Covid. Epstein is at the epicenter of the Deep State empire. He was essentially a real life James Bond villain. The timing could not be worse. He and Hillary are in the middle of trying to fight subpoenas to testify in person to the House Oversight Committee on the Epstein matter and what they might know. They want to submit sworn statements. Republican Committee Chair James Comer (KY-1) wants to be able to question and cross-examine them in person.  DOGE Geopolitical U.S. Snatches Venezuela Oil Tanker in Dark‑Hour Strike on Narco‑Terror Funding In a stealth operation carried out before dawn on Dec. 20, the U.S. Coast Guard—working alongside the Department of War—seized an oil tanker last seen in the terrorist state of Venezuela. The United States accused the ship's operators of moving sanctioned crude to fuel narco‑terror activity. Officials issued a stark warning to traffickers: “We will find you, and we will stop you. https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/2002481990755627050?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2002481990755627050%7Ctwgr%5E0acb5b51ea0ddfb03f7a0e25a375c9245159ce68%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html2002481990755627050 https://twitter.com/PeteHegseth/status/2002504193924342003?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2002504193924342003%7Ctwgr%5E1410e2476c70f24b31810862ee2f8e034c77bc3e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html2002504193924342003  conduct maritime interdiction operations — through OPERATION SOUTHERN SPEAR — to dismantle illicit criminal networks. Violence, drugs, and chaos will not control the Western Hemisphere. Source: breitbart.com U.S. imposes sanctions on family and associates of Venezuela’s Maduro and his wife The United States on Friday imposed sanctions on family members and associates of Nicolás Maduro and his wife, as Washington ratchets up pressure on the Venezuelan president. The U.S. Treasury Department said in a statement that it had imposed sanctions on seven people it said were tied to Maduro and his wife. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused them of “propping up Nicolás Maduro’s rogue narcostate.” “ Source: cbc.ca War/Peace Zelenskyy Announces Eastern Ukraine Citizens Will Not Be Allowed to Vote in Elections Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has agreed to hold elections if there is a ceasefire.  However, eastern Ukraine citizens, those currently living in the Donbas region, who are supportive of Russia, will not be permitted to vote. This creates a rather bizarre official hypocrisy within the Zelenskyy regime.  The official position of Zelenskyy is that Eastern Ukraine will never be accepted as a part of the Russian federation. Zelenskyy has recently noted, with EU leadership support, that his government will never recognize Eastern Ukraine as part of the Russian federation.  However, this same region, approximately 20% of Ukraine, will not be permitted to participate in his controlled election. Essentially, any Ukraine resident who does not support Zelenskyy will not be permitted to vote in any election, if any election is ever permitted.  Additionally, Zelenskyy notes that “there is the practice of voting abroad,” however, any region not controlled by Zelenskyy cannot submit votes. Source: zerohedge.com A Lie And Propaganda’: Gabbard Fact-Checks Reuters’ Russia Scaremongering In Real Time    Reuters posted an anonymously-sourced story pushing the idea that Russia is bent on reconstituting the Soviet Union. Before the metaphorical ink had dried, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard pounced, condemning the story as “a lie and propaganda” on behalf of “warmongers” seeking to derail President Trump’s drive to end the long and bloody Ukraine war.   Reuters vaguely attributed the purported US intelligence conclusions about Russia to “six sources familiar with US intelligence.”    https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/2002484806978834862?s=20  narrative to block President Trump's peace effort, and fomenting hysteria and fear among the people to get them to support the escalation of war, which is what NATO and the EU really want in order to pull the United States military directly into war with Russia. The truth is the US intelligence community has briefed policymakers, including the Democrat HPSCI member quoted by Reuters, that US Intelligence assesses that Russia seeks to avoid a larger war with NATO. It also assesses that, as the last few years have shown, Russia's battlefield performance indicates it does not currently have the capability to conquer and occupy all of Ukraine, let alone Europe. https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/2002503405156151648?s=20   invade/conquer Europe (in order to gin up support for their pro-war policies). The truth is that ‘US intelligence' assesses that Russia does not even have the capability to conquer and occupy Ukraine, what to speak of ‘invading and occupying' Europe.   Source: zerohedge.com WATCH: US CENTCOM Releases Footage from Operation Hawkeye Strikes Against 70+ ISIS Targets  US Central Command released footage from Operation Hawkeye strikes against ISIS militants and facilities on Friday night. “Tonight, U.S. and Jordanian forces struck 70+ ISIS targets in Syria with 100+ precision munitions. Peace through strength,” CENTCOM said on X. This is one of 10 operations conducted in Syria and Iraq since the December 13 ambush in Syria, which left multiple American service members injured and two soldiers and a civilian interpreter killed. Twenty-three terrorist operatives have been killed or detained, according to CENTCOM. “We will continue to relentlessly pursue terrorists who seek to harm Americans and our partners across the region,” CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper said. TAMPA, Fla.- Following the attack on U.S. and partner forces last Saturday, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) commenced Operation Hawkeye Strike at 4 pm ET against ISIS in Syria, Dec. 19, at the Commander in Chief's direction. Source: thegatewaypundit.com   of Syria, led by a man who is working very hard to bring Greatness back to Syria, and is fully in support. All terrorists who are evil enough to attack Americans are hereby warned — YOU WILL BE HIT HARDER THAN YOU HAVE EVER BEEN HIT BEFORE IF YOU, IN ANY WAY, ATTACK OR THREATEN THE U.S.A. DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/2002717078722052256?s=20  reclassify serious crimes as less severe “intermediate offenses” that are not publicly reported. https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2002421989886075083?s=20 BREAKING: HUD Sec. Scott Turner CONFIRMS major investigation into Boston for anti-white public housing discrimination“They were using discriminatory housing policies in their city! We found a quote on their website that said they will integrate ‘racial equity at every level of city government.'”“They put race above reality. They put race above merit and need. Our job at HUD is to enforce and uphold the fair housing – and they were evading and encouraging landlords and property owners to evade the Fair Housing Act!”“They have been put on NOTICE. We uphold and enforce this law.” https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/2002091915819253766?s=20  weaponized against Minnesota!” GOOD. IT’S CALLED ACCOUNTABILITY, TIM. “They’re threatening us with this. And this is what happens when you have a floundering presidency, and it is about those ballrooms and everything else. Now we’re back on transgender folks. And these are healthcare providers providing the best guidance to parents and children to get their care.” “It’s on every front! It’s CDLs, it’s transportation money, it’s money across the board that they have weaponized!” He should be worried. https://twitter.com/AAGDhillon/status/2002596210620969230?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/2002531244131991931?s=20 https://twitter.com/cb_doge/status/2001646253655097726?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2002203857955549464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2002203857955549464%7Ctwgr%5E7d1378774cdcbdfe43552d1c5b5ef213bd4f721f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html2002203857955549464 President Trump's Plan Democrats Have Devised a Plan to Compete With Turning Point USA for Young Voters and it's Going to be a Disaster Democrats have decided that they need to have their own version of Turning Point USA in order to appeal to young voters and what they have come up with is the most Democrat thing ever. It's going to be a total disaster. It's called the ‘DNC National Youth Coordinated Table'. It's not a grassroots group, it's completely fabricated. And you can just imagine how meetings of this group are going to go, with mini-groups within the group fighting for dominance and power. Newsweek reported on this: Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/2002577300802711720?s=20 DOJ Appeals Controversial Ruling That Disqualified Trump-Appointed U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, Resulting in the Dismissal of Charges Against Letitia James and James Comey The Department of Justice has formally appealed a controversial ruling that disqualified Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, a decision that directly led to the dismissal of federal charges against James Comey and Letitia James. According to a Notice of Appeal filed on December 19, the Trump-led DOJ is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to overturn a lower-court ruling that declared Halligan's appointment unconstitutional and voided every prosecutorial action she took while in office. Source: thegatewaypundit.com JUST IN: DOJ Wins Motion to Unseal Documents on Investigation into Trump Shooter Thomas Crooks The Department of Justice announced that it successfully moved to unseal documents related to the investigation into would-be Trump assassin Thomas Crooks.  “The Department of Justice received court approval to disclose to Congress documents gathered as part of the FBI's investigation of Thomas Crooks and his attempt to assassinate President Trump,” the Western District of Pennsylvania announced on X. A copy of the motion and order can be found here. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/AAGDhillon/status/2002596363138445539?s=20 Justice Department Sues Four States Including Georgia After Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger Sides With Democrats in Failure to Produce Voter Rolls https://twitter.com/AAGDhillon/status/2001775020566286614?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2001775020566286614%7Ctwgr%5Ee92dad24c2453e3b35c6a465ec1523cafbc35499%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fjustice-department-sues-four-states-including-georgia-after%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/2001992915850260516?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarkPaoletta/status/2002483634251461079?s=20   memorial to President John F. Kennedy and now additionally honors President Donald J. Trump, who has brought America back and saved the Trump-Kennedy Center. The Board's action is permissible under the statute and no legislation is necessary. The Board’s action does nothing to change the statutory title. Instead, the Board has–in line with longstanding Executive Branch practice–designated a new name. For example, The Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer, within the Office of Management & Budget, is designated by statute as the “Office of Electronic Government.” But it's long gone by the name “Office of the Federal Chief Information Officer” in official, public, and internal communications. Similarly, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is designated by statute as the “Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.” But since the beginning, the agency has long gone by the name Consumer Financial Protection Bureau or CFPB in all official communications, correspondence with the Hill, titles and signage on its buildings. The “United States Institute of Peace” was established by statute but was renamed by the Department of State as the “Donald J. Trump United States Institute of Peace.” The Department of War was established as the “Department of Defense” by statute in 1947. Earlier this year, President Trump authorized the use of the name “Department of War” and the name is now etched on the Pentagon's building and in official correspondence and public communications. It is entirely fitting for the Board of Trustees to vote to add President Trump to the title so that this Center is now named The Donald J. Trump And The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. President Trump has provided superb leadership at every level to save the Kennedy Center from financial ruin and wokeness, and to bring our national treasure to new heights! Thank you, @kencen Board of Trustees for honoring President Trump. I have been going to the Kennedy Center for decades and have never seen such energy and excitement as I did at the Christmas tree lighting and Noel performance. The Golden Age is here!   AND ORDER. As your next Governor, Bruce will continue to fight hard to Grow the Economy, Cut Taxes, and Regulations, Promote MADE IN THE U.S.A., Champion American Energy DOMINANCE, Strengthen our Military/Veterans, Advance Election Integrity, and Protect our always under siege Second Amendment!   Bruce Blakeman is a FANTASTIC guy, will win the big November Election and, without hesitation, has my Complete and Total Endorsement for Governor of the ONCE GREAT STATE OF NEW YORK (IT CAN BE GREAT AGAIN!). BRUCE BLAKEMAN WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!  (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

12.19.2025 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Trump Name on Kennedy Center? DC Police Chief Rips Critics, CFPB Redlining Threat, Warnock v Trump The Kennedy Center slaps Donald Trump's name on the building and website--But is it legal? We'll break it down. Plus, DC Police Chief Pamela Smith tells critics "F you" and storms out in a fiery speech, you won't want to miss it. And Consumer Financial Protection Bureau now run by a Project 2025 insider--proposes rules that could revive modern redlining. Global Black Economic Forum CEO Alphonso David joins us on the threat to Black homeownership. Donald Trump is pissed off with NBC News and Senator Raphael Warnock after Warnock appeared on Meet the Press,Trump is accusing the network of political bias and suggesting it should face consequences over its broadcast license. #BlackStarNetwork partner: Fanbasehttps://www.startengine.com/offering/fanbase This Reg A+ offering is made available through StartEngine Primary, LLC, member FINRA/SIPC. This investment is speculative, illiquid, and involves a high degree of risk, including the possible loss of your entire investment. You should read the Offering Circular (https://bit.ly/3VDPKjD) and Risks (https://bit.ly/3ZQzHl0) related to this offering before investing. Download the Black Star Network app at http://www.blackstarnetwork.com! We're on iOS, AppleTV, Android, AndroidTV, Roku, FireTV, XBox and SamsungTV. The #BlackStarNetwork is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's episode features Part 1 of our November 4 webinar, "The CFPB's Most Ambitious Regulatory Agenda Ever." In this packed episode, our expert panel breaks down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's largest and boldest regulatory agenda to date. Discussing an unprecedented lineup of 24 rulemaking items that could reshape the consumer financial services industry. What's Included: Unprecedented Regulatory Activity: We unpack why this semi-annual agenda stands out, the record number of proposed rules, and what this means for financial institutions, FinTechs, and consumers alike. Hot Topics Covered: From sweeping changes in mortgage servicing to open banking (1033 of Dodd-Frank/personal financial data rights), small business lending rules (1071 of Dodd-Frank), and the rollout of the Financial Data Transparency Act, we cover all the major initiatives and legal battles on the horizon. Industry Insight: Hear why certain rules are stirring up controversy, what compliance challenges lie ahead, and how litigation and funding woes at the CFPB might impact the pace of change. Practical Impact: Learn about technical corrections in remittance transfer rules, new standards for data sharing, and what these changes mean for day-to-day business operations. Meet Your Speakers from Ballard Spahr: Alan Kaplinsky (Host & Moderator): Senior Counsel, founder and former leader of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group  Rich Andreano, Jr.: Partner and head of the firm's Mortgage Banking Group  John Culhane, Jr.: Partner in the Consumer Financial Services Group  Greg Szewczyk: Chair of the firm's Privacy and Data Security Group  Mudasar Pham-Khan: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group  Kristen Larson: Of Counsel, Consumer Financial Services Group  Daniel Wilkerson: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group  Rob Lieber: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group  Aja Finger: Associate, Consumer Financial Services Group  Tune in for strategic insights and practical tips to help you prepare for the CFPB's evolving rulebook. Whether you're a compliance leader, financial executive, or simply interested in how Washington's boldest moves will impact your world, this episode is your essential guide to what's next in consumer financial services. Don't miss Part 2, coming next week with even more updates and expert perspectives! Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

This Day in Legal History: Trump ImpeachedOn December 18, 2019, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald J. Trump, marking the third presidential impeachment in American history. The impeachment followed a months-long investigation centered on Trump's dealings with Ukraine. House Democrats alleged that the president abused the powers of his office by pressuring a foreign government to investigate a political rival. A second article charged Trump with obstruction of Congress for directing executive branch officials not to comply with House subpoenas. The votes largely split along party lines, reflecting deep political polarization.Impeachment itself did not remove Trump from office, but instead formally accused him of constitutional wrongdoing. Under the Constitution, the House holds the sole power of impeachment, functioning similarly to a grand jury. Once impeached, the process shifted to the Senate, which is responsible for conducting a trial. Chief Justice John Roberts later presided over the Senate proceedings, as required when a president is tried. The Senate ultimately acquitted Trump in February 2020, falling short of the two-thirds vote needed for conviction. Despite the acquittal, the impeachment reinforced Congress's oversight authority over the executive branch. The episode also highlighted ongoing debates about the limits of presidential power and the role of impeachment as a constitutional check.A federal appeals court in Washington reversed an earlier ruling that would have allowed the Trump administration to move forward with mass firings at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Sitting as a full bench, the court blocked plans to cut as much as 90% of the agency's workforce and agreed to rehear the administration's appeal of a lower court order that had paused efforts to dismantle the bureau. As a result, the administration remains temporarily barred from gutting the agency while litigation continues. The legal fight has stretched on for months, during which the CFPB has been largely sidelined. Congress originally created the CFPB after the 2008 financial crisis to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices by banks, lenders, and other financial companies. Its mission includes enforcing federal consumer financial laws and preventing the kinds of predatory conduct that helped trigger the financial collapse. Supporters of the agency, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, praised the ruling as necessary to shield families from financial harm.Critics within the Trump administration have argued the CFPB is politically motivated (as protecting consumers from predatory financial practices is political, apparently) and should be eliminated, though they have also claimed in court that some version of the agency would remain. Complicating matters further, the CFPB faces a funding dispute over whether it can draw money from the Federal Reserve, raising concerns that it could run out of operating funds.US appeals court tosses decision allowing Trump mass firings at consumer bureau | ReutersFull DC Circuit Will Review Trump's Bid to Dismantle CFPB (2)A group of leading medical organizations asked a federal judge to allow their lawsuit challenging vaccine policy changes under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to move forward. The groups argue that recent actions by Kennedy and the Department of Health and Human Services will reduce vaccination rates and endanger public health. They point to a directive removing COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for pregnant women and children without advance notice or explanation. The lawsuit also challenges Kennedy's decision to dismiss 17 experts from a CDC advisory panel and replace them with members more aligned with his views. That reconstituted panel later voted to scale back broad vaccine recommendations, including limiting COVID-19 shots to shared decision-making with doctors and eliminating universal recommendations for certain childhood vaccines.The plaintiffs claim the panel was unlawfully reshaped in violation of federal law requiring advisory committees to be balanced and free from improper influence. Government lawyers argue the medical groups lack standing because the CDC's guidance merely advises consultation with doctors and does not directly harm them. The plaintiffs counter that they have been injured by having to divert resources to help doctors navigate confusing and abrupt policy shifts. The judge indicated skepticism toward the government's standing argument, particularly in light of statements suggesting doctors could face liability for deviating from CDC guidance. A ruling on whether the case can proceed is expected before a scheduled January hearing.US medical groups urge judge to allow challenge to Kennedy-backed vaccine policies to proceed | ReutersA federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., to remain in place while legal challenges continue. A three-judge panel said the administration was likely to succeed in defending the deployment, temporarily blocking a lower court order that would have ended it. The ruling gives Trump an interim victory as he claims broad authority to use troops for domestic law enforcement. The deployment began earlier in the year and expanded after two Guard members were shot near the White House. The judges emphasized that Washington, D.C.'s unique status—because it is not a state—strengthens presidential authority there. District officials who sued to stop the deployment said the decision is preliminary and does not resolve the underlying legal questions. The White House praised the ruling as confirmation of the president's lawful powers and credited the deployment with improving public safety. The case comes amid broader disputes over Trump's efforts to deploy troops in several major cities despite objections from local and state leaders. Lower courts have generally been skeptical of those efforts, rejecting claims that protests against federal immigration enforcement qualify as rebellions. The Supreme Court is widely expected to weigh in on the scope of presidential power in this area.US appeals court says Trump's National Guard deployment in DC may continue | ReutersTrump's DC Troop Deployment Gets Extension From US Appeals CourtA federal judge allowed President Donald Trump to continue work on a proposed White House ballroom, rejecting an emergency request from preservation advocates to immediately halt the project. The judge ruled that the National Trust failed to show imminent, irreparable harm that would justify stopping construction at this early stage. However, he cautioned that the government may be required to reverse certain underground work if it ends up locking in a specific design. The project involves replacing the demolished East Wing with a large ballroom that would be significantly bigger than prior White House renovations. Trump has described the ballroom as a privately funded project and recently increased its estimated cost. Preservationists argue the administration moved forward without required public input and bypassed federal planning and design review processes. The government countered that the design is still in flux and that above-ground construction will not begin for several months. Relying on those representations, the judge found no immediate risk of irreversible aesthetic damage. He scheduled another hearing to reconsider whether the project should be paused as the lawsuit continues. For now, construction may proceed while the court reviews whether the administration complied with historic preservation and planning laws.Judge allows Trump's ballroom project to proceed for now | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Monday, December 15th, 2025Today, a mass shooting at Brown University leaves multiple dead and wounded; another 15 people were killed at Bondi Beach in Sidney Australia in a mass shooting; TSA is providing air passenger data to ICE; a gun toting Border Patrol thug is exposed as a racist online troll; the House Oversight committee has released a new batch of photos from the Epstein Estate; Trump allies pressured Romania into lifting travel restrictions on the Tate brothers; the deeply personal reasons Indiana Republicans pushed back against Trump; Colorado rejects the President's pardon of election thief Tina Peters; Marjorie Taylor Greene is trying to oust Mike Johnson as Speaker; Republicans in the House defy Trump and vote with Democrats to restore bargaining rights for federal workers; Abrego Garcia remains a free man after the Trump administration tried to issue a retroactive deportation order; Trump judges have once again blocked Judge Boasberg's contempt proceedings; a judge orders Dan Richman's emails at the core of the Comey case be returned to him; House Democrats will ask for the release of Volume II of Jack Smith's final report; and Allison and Dana deliver and your Good News.Thank You, DeleteMeGet 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to http://joindeleteme.com/DAILYBEANS and use promo code DAILYBEANS at checkout.Thank You, Naked WinesTo get 6 bottles of wine for $39.99, head to http://nakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Trump Issues SHOCK RESPONSE to MY REQUEST About THE FILES|Allison Gill|Midas Touch|The Breakdownhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EUjaptr9kUSubscribe to the MSW YouTube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/@MSWMediaPodsStoriesBrown University shooting live updates: Person of interest to be released from custody|NBC Newshttps://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/brown-university-shooting-live-updates-rcna249097Bondi Beach shooting live updates: 15 dead at Hanukkah event, including children|NBC https://www.nbcnews.com/world/australia/live-blog/bondi-beach-australia-live-updates-rcna249083Colorado Officials Reject Trump's ‘Pardon' of a Convicted Election Denier|NYThttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/13/us/politics/trump-tina-peters.htmlThe deeply personal reasons why many Indiana Senate Republicans said no to Trump|MSNhttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-deeply-personal-reasons-why-many-indiana-senate-republicans-said-no-to-trump/ar-AA1SbWjAHouse votes to nullify Trump order and restore bargaining rights for federal workers|APhttps://apnews.com/article/democrats-trump-federal-worker-union-rights-republicans-1bbd71bb6236aa2ff2c3b816e54327a1Marjorie Taylor Greene's farewell gift to Mike Johnson: a longshot plot to oust him|MSNOWhttps://www.ms.now/news/marjorie-taylor-greene-mike-johnson-motion-to-vacateHouse Democrats release more photos from Jeffrey Epstein's estate|NBChttps://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/new-epstein-photos-show-trump-clinton-bill-gates-woody-allen-steve-ban-rcna248819House Democrats to ask for release of Jack Smith classified documents report|Guardianhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/12/house-democrats-aileen-cannon-jack-smithImmigration Agents Are Using Air Passenger Data for Deportation Effort|NYThttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/12/us/politics/immigration-tsa-passenger-data.htmlGun-Toting Border Patrol Goon Unmasked as Racist Online Troll|Daily Beasthttps://www.thedailybeast.com/gun-toting-border-patrol-goon-unmasked-as-racist-online-troll/How a Manosphere Star Accused of Rape and Trafficking Was Freed|NYThttps://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/10/us/andrew-tate-barron-trump-romania.htmlUS federal judge orders ICE not to rearrest Kilmar Abrego Garcia|JURIST NEWShttps://www.jurist.org/news/2025/12/us-federal-judge-orders-ice-not-to-rearrest-kilmar-abrego-garcia/Good Trouble - https://near.tl/sm/ik-ZushRaThis is a call for Good Trouble and is time sensitive.Project 2025 implementation has progressed to gut the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA Act).The public comment period ends at 11:59pm ET on December 15th.https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/CFPB-2025-0039-0001From The Good Newshttps://humanesocietyofmacomb.orgPup in Tucson form - https://near.tl/sm/aySLYhb9Rhttps://rachelcorriefoundation.orghttps://www.instagram.com/dlnvnsDirect questions to - goldcard@doc.gov→Go To https://DailyBeansPod.com Click on ‘Good News and Good Trouble' to Share YoursOur Donation Linkshttps://www.nationalsecuritylaw.org/donate, https://secure.actblue.com/donate/msw-bwc, http://WhistleblowerAid.org/beansJoin Dana and The Daily Beans and support on Giving Tuesdayhttp://onecau.se/_ekes71Federal workers - email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Dr. Allison Gill - https://www.muellershewrote.com, https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrote.com, https://instagram.com/muellershewrote, https://www.youtube.com/@MSWMediaPodsDana Goldberg - https://bsky.app/profile/dgcomedy.bsky.social, https://www.instagram.com/dgcomedy, https://www.facebook.com/dgcomedy, https://danagoldberg.comMore from MSW Media - https://mswmedia.com/shows, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, https://www.muellershewrote.comReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:https://apple.co/3XNx7ckWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?https://patreon.com/thedailybeanshttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/https://apple.co/3UKzKt0 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Thomas Berry of the Cato Institute and Jed Shugerman of the Boston University School of Law join the recap the oral arguments from Trump v. Slaughter and debate whether the statutory removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission violate the separation of powers. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates.   Resources  Thomas Berry, Brief of the Cato Institute as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners (10/17/2025)  Jed Shugerman, Brief Amicus Curiae of Professor Jed Handelsman Shugerman in Support of Respondents (11/14/2025)  Jed Shugerman, “The Indecisions of 1789: Inconstant Originalism and Strategic Ambiguity” (2023)  Jane Manners and Lev Menand, “The Three Permissions: Presidential Removal and the Statutory Limits of Agency Independence” (2021)  Marbury v. Madison (1803)  Myers v. United States (1926)  Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935)  Morrison v. Olson (1988)  Seila Law LLC v. CFPB (2020) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the ⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠ Explore ⁠Pursuit: The Founders' Guide to Happiness⁠ ⁠Sign up⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming ⁠live program⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠YouTube⁠ Support our important work:   ⁠⁠⁠Donate

Today's podcast brings listeners a timely and insightful discussion as our panel examines the CFPB's proposed amendments to Regulation B under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). As our regular listeners know, we released an episode yesterday, and we are providing this additional special episode in light of a development we consider both time-sensitive and exceptionally important. The discussion is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel, founder and former chair for 25 years of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, and features these distinguished experts in the field: ·       Bradley Blower, Founder of Inclusive Partners LLC. ·       John Culhane, Jr., Senior Partner and charter member of Ballard Spahr's fair lending team. ·       Richard Andreano, Jr., Practice Group Leader for Ballard Spahr's Mortgage Banking Group and the head of Ballard Spahr's fair lending team.  Together, the panel takes listeners through the sweeping changes proposed to Reg B, including the elimination of the longstanding disparate impact provisions, significant revisions to discouragement standards, and new limitations on special purpose credit programs for for-profit entities. The conversation covers the legal and political motivations behind the proposal, references to recent Supreme Court decisions, and the implications for lenders, regulators, and consumers. The group also addresses the unusually short 30-day comment period and speculates on why the CFPB may be moving quickly to finalize the rule. Tune in for expert analysis, must-know takeaways, and predictions about industry impact and possible legal challenges. This episode is essential listening for anyone invested in the future of consumer financial services and fair lending. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

This Day in Legal History: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr's Kid Sworn in as JusticeOn December 8, 1902, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. was sworn in as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, beginning one of the most storied judicial careers in American history. Appointed by President Theodore Roosevelt, Holmes brought not just legal brilliance but a fierce sense of independence to the bench—qualities that would define his nearly 30-year tenure. He would become known as “The Great Dissenter,” not because he loved conflict, but because he saw the Constitution as a living document that demanded humility, skepticism of dogma, and above all, respect for democratic governance.Holmes shaped modern constitutional law, particularly in his groundbreaking First Amendment opinions. In Schenck v. United States (1919), he famously coined the “clear and present danger” test, establishing a foundational limit on government power to suppress speech. Though that decision upheld a conviction, Holmes's dissent later that year in Abrams v. United States marked his turn toward a much broader vision of free expression—one that laid the groundwork for modern civil liberties jurisprudence.A Civil War veteran wounded at Antietam, Holmes served with the Massachusetts Volunteers and carried shrapnel in his body for the rest of his life. His long memory gave him historical depth: legend holds he met both Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy—Lincoln as a young Union officer in Washington, and JFK decades later when the future president visited the aged Holmes on his 90th birthday. While the Lincoln meeting is plausible and widely accepted, the Kennedy encounter is well documented—photos exist of JFK visiting Holmes in 1932, shortly before the justice's death.Holmes's legal philosophy emphasized restraint, often reminding fellow jurists that the Constitution “is made for people of fundamentally differing views.” He resisted turning the judiciary into a super-legislature, warning against confusing personal preference with constitutional mandate. His opinions, dissents, and aphorisms—“taxes are what we pay for civilized society,” among them—still echo in courtrooms and classrooms today.By the time he retired in 1932 at age 90, Holmes had become an icon: not just a jurist, but a symbol of intellectual honesty and constitutional humility. His December 8 appointment wasn't just another judicial swearing-in—it was the beginning of a philosophical legacy that still defines the boundaries of American legal thought.Amit Agarwal, a former clerk to Justices Alito and Kavanaugh, will soon find himself arguing against the very ideology he once clerked under—defending limits on presidential power in a case that could gut a nearly century-old precedent, Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935). He'll be representing former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, who sued after President Trump gave her the boot, and whose case now tees up a potentially seismic shift in how presidents control independent agencies.At issue is whether the president can remove members of independent commissions—like the FTC—at will, or whether statutory “for cause” protections, created by Congress and upheld since the New Deal, still mean anything. If the Supreme Court overturns Humphrey's Executor, it would blow a hole in the legal framework that has shielded multi-member agencies from raw political interference since Roosevelt tried—and failed—to remake the FTC in his own image.Let's pause here: Humphrey's Executor isn't just some dusty New Deal relic. It drew a sharp line between executive officers who serve the president directly and independent regulators who are supposed to be immune from daily political whims. The Court in 1935 said: no, FDR, you can't just fire an FTC commissioner because he's not singing from your hymnbook. That ruling became the backbone of modern agency independence—from the Fed to the SEC to the NLRB. Without it, the next president could dismiss any regulatory head who doesn't toe the party line. You want crypto rules to mean something? Food safety? Banking supervision? Say goodbye to all that if we pretend these agencies are just White House interns with better titles.But here's where it gets interesting: Agarwal is making the conservative case for restraint. Now working at Protect Democracy, he's arguing that letting presidents fire independent commissioners at will isn't a win for constitutional governance—it's a power grab that warps the original design. He's invoked Burkean conservatism—the idea that practical experience should trump theoretical purity—and warns that blind devotion to the “unitary executive theory” threatens institutional integrity more than it protects separation of powers.And Agarwal isn't alone. A collection of conservative legal scholars, former judges, and ex-White House lawyers—some with deep Federalist Society credentials—have filed briefs supporting his position. Their argument? That Humphrey's Executor is an “originalist” decision, faithful to the Founders' ambivalence about concentrated executive power, especially in domestic administration.Still, let's be honest: the Court is unlikely to be swayed by this internal dissent. The Roberts Court has already chipped away at agency independence in decisions like Seila Law (2020) and Loper Bright (2024), where it let Trump fire the CFPB director and overturned Chevron deference respectively. With a solid conservative majority, and multiple justices openly embracing a muscular vision of presidential control, the writing may already be on the wall.Which is precisely what makes Agarwal's stand so notable. This isn't some progressive legal activist parachuting in from the ACLU (though his wife did work there). This is someone who backed Kavanaugh publicly, donated to Nikki Haley, and spent years rising through the conservative legal pipeline—only to conclude that this version of executive power isn't conservative at all. It's reactionary.So what happens if Humphrey's goes down? Beyond the short-term question of whether Slaughter gets her job back, the bigger issue is how much power presidents will wield over what were supposed to be politically insulated regulatory bodies. Will a ruling in Trump's favor mean future presidents can purge the Fed board? Fire NLRB members mid-term? Flatten the independence of enforcement agencies? The Court may claim it's just restoring “constitutional structure,” but don't be surprised if that structure starts to look a lot like one-man rule.Agarwal, to his credit, is saying: not so fast. Sometimes conserving means preserving. And sometimes defending the Constitution means restraining the people who claim to speak for it the loudest.Ex-Alito, Kavanaugh Clerk Defends Limits on Trump's Firing PowerFight over Trump's power to fire FTC member heads to US Supreme Court | ReutersA federal judge has temporarily barred the Justice Department from using evidence seized from Daniel Richman, a former legal adviser to ex-FBI Director James Comey, in any future attempts to revive criminal charges against Comey. The move comes just weeks after the original case was dismissed due to the lead prosecutor's unlawful appointment.At issue is whether federal prosecutors violated Richman's Fourth Amendment rights by searching his personal computer without a warrant during earlier investigations into media leaks tied to Comey's 2020 congressional testimony. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly sided with Richman—for now—saying he's likely to succeed on the merits and ordering the government to isolate and secure the data until at least December 12.The contested materials had been used to support now-dropped charges that Comey made false statements and obstructed Congress regarding FBI leaks about the Clinton and Trump investigations. But Richman, once a special FBI employee himself, argues the search was illegal and wants the files deleted or returned.The Justice Department, undeterred, is reportedly considering a second indictment of Comey. But between shaky prosecutorial appointments and constitutional challenges like this one, their case is rapidly sliding into legally questionable territory.US federal judge temporarily blocks evidence use in dismissed Comey case | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a controversial book removal case out of Llano County, Texas, effectively allowing local officials to keep 17 books off public library shelves—titles that deal with race, LGBTQ+ identity, puberty, and even flatulence.The justices let stand a divided 5th Circuit ruling that found no First Amendment violation in the county's decision to pull the books. That decision reversed a lower court order requiring the books be returned and rejected the plaintiffs' argument that library patrons have a constitutional “right to receive information.” The 5th Circuit held that libraries have wide discretion to curate collections, and that removing titles doesn't equate to banning them altogether—people can still buy them online, the court reasoned.The dispute began in 2021 when local officials responded to complaints by residents, ultimately purging books including Maurice Sendak's In the Night Kitchen (due to nude illustrations), as well as works on slavery and gender identity. Opponents of the removal sued, citing free speech violations. But the case now stands as a significant blow to that theory—at least in the 5th Circuit, which covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.The Supreme Court's refusal to intervene leaves unresolved a key question: does the First Amendment protect not just the right to speak, but the right to access certain information in public institutions? For now, in parts of the South, the answer appears to be no.US Supreme Court turns away appeal of Texas library book ban | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Even with the year-long purge of long-standing federal government agencies, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau still stands as a bulwark for people who seek information and resources in their dealings with financial institutions. On this episode, James 'Jim” McCarthy of McCarthy Hatch shares about his days getting the bureau off the ground—and how his company utilizes real-time risk prediction for the consumer financial industry to smooth the path for consumers and FIs to achieve positive complaint resolutions.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has issued a new rule that reinforces national standards for credit reporting. It confirms that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state rules, a move the Consumer Data Industry Association says will improve consistency, lower costs, and protect access to credit. Dan Smith, President and CEO of CDIA, is here to explain what the rule means for lenders, borrowers, and the future of credit data.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today on the Federal Drive with Terry GertonA new CFPB rule strengthens credit data standards, helping lenders assess risk and borrowers access affordable creditPSC's vision conference proved that forecasting government contractor workload for 2026 is no easy taskOutdated SEC communications rules are putting compliance and competitiveness at riskSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week's Ask Farnoosh pulls together some of the most revealing financial stories of the week, grom pandemic-era homebuyers now feeling “locked in” by their ultra-low mortgage rates, to Gen Z putting marriage, kids, and career plans on hold until they can afford a home. Farnoosh also breaks down an under-the-radar proposal from the CFPB that could weaken anti-discrimination protections in lending, a shift that could impact mortgages, auto loans, credit cards, and small-business financing.Then, she heads to the mailbag to answer listener questions:Should you borrow more on a home-equity loan to protect your savings during a renovation?How can a self-employed spouse take full advantage of a healthcare FSA?What exactly is the IRS “contract” that lets you withdraw from retirement accounts early? (Hint: SEPP/72(t) and the Rule of 55.)And if you've bought a home for your parents, are you putting your own retirement at risk? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Trump administration is refusing to take funds to pay for ongoing operations at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, arguing the funding structure is illegal. What does this mean for the agency's future, including its recent efforts to curb the small business lending data rule and define open banking? Kate Berry of American Banker and Evan Weinberger of Bloomberg Law weigh in on what's going on and what happens next. 

Inside the unraveling of President Trump's relationship with some Republicans and parts of his MAGA base over the Epstein files; the fmr. Director of the CFPB Richard Cordray explains how the Trump administration's destruction of the CFPB harms consumers; which cities Trump is eyeing next for his ICE immigration crackdown and how local leaders are preparing To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Rep. Jamie Raskin discusses the ramifications of ongoing battle over the Epstein files; all the reasons why Trump's promise to send $2k checks to some Americans won't happen; the fmr. Director of the CFPB Richard Cordray explains how the Trump administration's destruction of the CFPB harms consumers; why the prosecutions of two people from the top of Trump's enemies list might be hitting a roadblock. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week, a court filing showed that the Trump Administration has declared the current funding structure for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to be illegal. The agency was created in the wake of the global financial crisis to protect consumers and collect consumer complaints. Project 2025 architect Russell Vought is currently acting director of the CFPB. He has said repeatedly that he wants to see the CFPB close its doors, and back in February, he ordered employees of the agency to stop working. To talk more about the Trump Administration taking yet another axe to the CFPB and what happens next, we spoke to David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect.And in headlines, the Justice Department sues to block new Congressional district boundaries approved by California voters, the State Department makes it harder for people with conditions including cancer and diabetes to obtain visas, and Kristi Noem gives out $10,000 bonus checks to some TSA agents who worked through the shutdown.Show Notes: Check out The American Prospect – https://prospect.org/Call Congress – 202-224-3121Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) faces an unprecedented crisis that could force it to close by 2026. The Trump administration is challenging the agency's funding, arguing the Federal Reserve can't legally transfer money because it hasn't turned a profit. If the CFPB runs out of cash, experts warn it would dismantle crucial protections for working Americans. Independent media has never been more important. Please support this channel by subscribing here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g?sub_confirmation=1 Join this channel with a membership for exclusive early access and bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkbwLFZhawBqK2b9gW08z3g/join Five Minute News is an Evergreen Podcast, covering politics, inequality, health and climate - delivering independent, unbiased and essential news for the US and across the world. Visit us online at http://www.fiveminute.news Follow us on Bluesky https://bsky.app/profile/fiveminutenews.bsky.social Follow us on Instagram http://instagram.com/fiveminnews Support us on Patreon http://www.patreon.com/fiveminutenews You can subscribe to Five Minute News with your preferred podcast app, ask your smart speaker, or enable Five Minute News as your Amazon Alexa Flash Briefing skill. CONTENT DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed on this channel are those of the guests and authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Anthony Davis or Five Minute News LLC. Any content provided by our hosts, guests or authors are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything, in line with the First Amendment right to free and protected speech. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Everyone in their right mind already knows the gift: Trump ran on helping working people, then immediately threw working Americans to the wolves in favor of helping the ultra-wealthy. But it's not just Trump who is screwing us; he's made it easier for businesses to exploit the average American as well. He recently eviscerated the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has stood in place to defend average Americans from unethical and predatory business practices. So what happens now, and how can we look to defend ourselves with the wolves circling? To answer this, Adam sits with progressive Julie Morgan, of the progressive think tank the Century Foundation, who worked in both with the CFPB and the Department of Education.SUPPORT THE SHOW ON PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/adamconoverSEE ADAM ON TOUR: https://www.adamconover.net/tourdates/SUBSCRIBE to and RATE Factually! on:» Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/factually-with-adam-conover/id1463460577» Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0fK8WJw4ffMc2NWydBlDyJAbout Headgum: Headgum is an LA & NY-based podcast network creating premium podcasts with the funniest, most engaging voices in comedy to achieve one goal: Making our audience and ourselves laugh. Listen to our shows at https://www.headgum.com.» SUBSCRIBE to Headgum: https://www.youtube.com/c/HeadGum?sub_confirmation=1» FOLLOW us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/headgum» FOLLOW us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/headgum/» FOLLOW us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@headgum» Advertise on Factually! via Gumball.fmSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bankruptcies appear to be mounting in the subprime auto lending business. This all comes as auto loan delinquencies are rising, and the price of new and used cars stays stubbornly high. Amid all this, the Trump administration is quietly exploring a rollback of federal supervision of subprime auto lenders. Then, could federal law override state law that prevents medical debt from affecting your credit score? Plus, OpenAI goes from non-profit to for-profit.Correction (Oct. 29, 2025): The introduction for the story about Consumer Financial Protection Bureau oversight of auto loan lenders in this episode contained an error that has been corrected. The threshold for which companies the CFPB can investigate involves how many loans those companies originate.