Knowledge (XXG)

Collins v. Yellen

Source 📝

31: 409:(CFPB) was called into question. Like FHFA, the CFPB was formed by legislation passed by Congress, and specified that it was to be overseen by a single Director that can only be removed from office "for cause" and did not give the option for the President to remove the person "at will". The Supreme Court agreed that this structure was unconstitutional as it violated the 364:
as to encourage home ownership, during the housing market peak in 2005 and 2006 and represented a large risk should they fail. At the start of the crisis, the rationalization of the number of these low-interest mortgages disrupted the banking system, causing some larger banks to go into bankruptcy or
395:
on the basis that these funds were needed to offset the taxpayers' costs of the government's intervention to resolve the crisis. The decision also prevents both GSEs from using Treasury funds to pay their shareholders. Shareholders of both companies challenged the government's actions, stating that
455:
petitioned to the Supreme Court in 2019 to hear the case; the shareholders sought to resolve the split in the Circuit Courts as well as to question whether any decisions – including the profit taking decision 2012 – made under the unconstitutional structure should be reversed, while the government
476:
and the CFPB, the inability for the President to terminate the director of FHFA beyond "for cause" was unconstitutional. Related to the standing of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders, the Court was unanimous in that the FHFA's actions in taking over the GSEs was outlined by congressional
471:
The Supreme Court issued its decision on June 23, 2021. It ruled on two areas which affirmed, reversed, and vacated the Fifth Circuit's decision in parts and remanded the case for further review. On the subject of the constitutionality of the FHFA director, the Court ruled 7–2 to uphold the Fifth
163:
1. The shareholders’ statutory claim must be dismissed. The "anti-injunction clause" of the Recovery Act provides that unless review is specifically authorized by one of its provisions or is requested by the Director, "no court may take any action to restrain or affect the exercise of powers or
388:, the prior Director of OFHEO, named to the initial position. In September 2008, Lockhart issued an order to bring in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under FHFA's authority for the purposes of stabilizing both GSEs using funds allocated by Congress as a means to alleviate the mortgage crisis. 1247: 1048: 413:
between the executive and legislative branches. The Supreme Court ruled that the Director position of CFPB must be also removable by will, but otherwise did not challenge the function of the CFPB since they had found its purpose to be
724: 1483: 1405: 1567: 360:(GSE) that purchase mortgages and backed almost half of the mortgages in the United States. Analysis had found that the two GSEs had purchased a number of risky mortgages, those offered at below the 326:, and secondly, dismissed the lawsuit brought against the FHFA by shareholders of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as the takeover of these firms was an established power of the agency under terms of the 410: 312: 1413: 875: 596: 587: 401: 303: 83: 1577: 441: 433: 1499: 1231: 943: 714: 381: 339: 316: 54:
Patrick J. Collins, et al. v. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Janet L. Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury, et al. v. Patrick J. Collins, et al.
1150: 477:
authority in the Recovery Act of 2008, along with an "anti-injunction clause," and, thus, the lower courts should not have allowed their case to proceed.
250:
Alito, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Barrett; Breyer, Kagan (all but Part III–B); Gorsuch (all but Part III–C); Sotomayor (Parts I, II, and III–C)
1562: 391:
As part of this takeover, once the mortgage crisis was subdued in 2012, the FHFA routed the ongoing profits earned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the
322:
In a two-part decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the restriction on removal of the FHFA director by the President was unconstitutional in light of
369: 327: 392: 1557: 1381: 812: 1572: 936: 406: 308: 686: 35: 166:
2. The Recovery Act’s restriction on the President’s power to remove the FHFA Director, 12 U.S.C. §4512(b)(2), is unconstitutional.
1491: 929: 661: 357: 1158: 373: 298: 372:
in July of that year to try to stave off the effects of the recession. Among the law's goals included the formation of the
1024: 1008: 841: 377: 1016: 1530: 365:
seek means to avoid this, which disrupted the credit system and further exacerbated the crisis and caused a recession.
1314: 294: 1475: 1338: 1223: 1083: 641: 1306: 1118: 1067: 984: 500:
wrote an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, related to the FHFA directorship, joined by Justice
1365: 1357: 1032: 992: 533: 345: 1330: 1000: 1389: 1142: 1134: 1099: 691: 1322: 1373: 1298: 1255: 1196: 1075: 1040: 653: 67: 63: 1091: 879: 600: 385: 78: 616: 1177: 952: 886: 396:
these decisions prevent the company from building capital and is excessive governmental overreach.
650: 976: 842:"White House to replace Federal Housing Finance Agency director following Supreme Court decision" 715:"Supreme Court leaves consumer regulator standing but backs president's ability to fire director" 657: 315:; the FHFA shares a similar structure as the CFPB. The case extends the legal challenge to the 311:(CFPB), with a single director who could only be removed from office "for cause", violated the 1397: 913: 233: 921: 1440: 1239: 1126: 517: 1290: 895: 497: 485: 225: 209: 189: 484:
wrote the majority opinion to which all Justices had joined in full or in part. Justices
592: 561: 501: 197: 1551: 109: 1204: 795: 773: 751: 557: 521: 489: 481: 415: 221: 201: 181: 142: 127: 493: 353: 213: 106: 361: 349: 148: 840:
Mattingly, Phil; de Vogue, Ariane; Stracqualursi, Veronica (June 23, 2021).
813:"U.S. Supreme Court bolsters presidential power over housing finance agency" 513: 113: 274:
Kagan (in part and in the judgment), joined by Breyer, Sotomayor (Part II)
904: 799: 777: 755: 665: 131: 138: 436:, which had ruled that the structure of the CFPB was constitutional. 611: 609: 817: 719: 524:, "with an appointee who reflects the Administration's values". 460:
issued in June 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
124: 1518: 1463: 1278: 964: 925: 456:
challenged the Fifth Circuit's ruling. Following the ruling in
30: 846: 444:, which ruled both on its initial three-judge panel and at an 617:"Credit and blame: A must-read on the origins of the crisis" 687:"Supreme Court Weighs U.S. Profit Sweep at Fannie, Freddie" 468:
Oral hearings for the case were held on December 9, 2020.
384:(OFHEO). The new FHFA was run by a single Director, with 301:(FHFA). The case follows on the Court's prior ruling in 164:
functions of the Agency as a conservator or a receiver."
1568:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
747:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Seila Law LLC
685:
Ackerman, Andrew; Kendall, Brent (December 9, 2020).
588:
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
402:
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
307:, which found that the establishing structure of the 304:
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
424:
progressed through lower courts at the same time as
1432: 1349: 1215: 1188: 1169: 1110: 1059: 278: 270: 262: 254: 246: 241: 170: 157: 96: 91: 73: 59: 49: 42: 23: 642: 418:from the implementation of the Director position. 1500:Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission 1232:Springer v. Government of the Philippine Islands 399:As the case progressed, the Supreme Court heard 713:Mangan, Dan; Higgens, Tucker (June 29, 2020). 382:Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight 340:Federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 317:federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 937: 516:moved forward with replacing FHFA director, 8: 448:hearing that the FHFB was unconstitutional. 119:Affirmed in part, reversed in part sub nom. 1578:United States separation of powers case law 1515: 1460: 1346: 1275: 1056: 961: 944: 930: 922: 680: 678: 20: 370:Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 328:Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 344:Part of the contributing factors to the 582: 580: 576: 545: 297:case dealing with the structure of the 512:On the day of the decision, President 405:. In this case, the structure of the 18:2021 United States Supreme Court case 7: 1382:Humphrey's Executor v. United States 407:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 309:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 496:wrote concurring opinions. Justice 1049:FOMBPR v. Aurelius Investment, LLC 727:from the original on June 29, 2020 647:Tooltip Public Law (United States) 348:from 2007 to 2010 was the role of 36:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 1563:United States Supreme Court cases 1531:FEC v. NRA Political Victory Fund 953:United States Appointments Clause 882:___ (2021) is available from: 472:Circuit's decision that, as with 103:Collins v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency 358:government sponsored enterprises 29: 1492:Elgin v. Department of Treasury 1476:Thunder Basin Coal Co. v. Reich 520:, who had been appointed under 151:. granted, 141 S.Ct. 193 (2020) 1558:2021 in United States case law 1159:United States v. Arthrex, Inc. 374:Federal Housing Finance Agency 299:Federal Housing Finance Agency 1: 1484:Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB 1406:Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB 564:as Secretary of the Treasury. 378:Federal Housing Finance Board 376:(FHFA), merging the existing 293:, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a 1573:Appointments Clause case law 1017:Quackenbush v. United States 914:Supreme Court (slip opinion) 1315:McAllister v. United States 295:United States Supreme Court 282:Sotomayor, joined by Breyer 1594: 1339:Shurtleff v. United States 1224:Shoemaker v. United States 1189:Challenges to Appointments 905:Oyez (oral argument audio) 337: 1525: 1514: 1470: 1459: 1307:Crenshaw v. United States 1285: 1274: 1119:United States v. Germaine 1068:United States v. Hartwell 985:United States v. Le Baron 971: 960: 175: 162: 28: 1366:Parsons v. United States 1358:United States v. Perkins 1216:Appointments by Congress 1033:NLRB v. SW General, Inc. 993:Mimmack v. United States 534:Unitary executive theory 346:subprime mortgage crisis 1390:Wiener v. United States 1350:Limits on Removal Power 1331:Reagan v. United States 1143:Edmond v. United States 1135:Freytag v. Commissioner 1100:Burnap v. United States 1001:United States v. Corson 966:Appointment of Officers 692:The Wall Street Journal 43:Argued December 9, 2020 1465:Jurisdiction stripping 1374:Myers v. United States 1299:Blake v. United States 1256:Weiss v. United States 1197:Ryder v. United States 1084:United States v. Smith 1076:United States v. Mouat 1060:Officers vs. Employees 1041:Ortiz v. United States 1025:United States v. Smith 1009:United States v. Eaton 432:had been heard in the 1323:Keim v. United States 386:James B. Lockhart III 45:Decided June 23, 2021 1178:NLRB v. Noel Canning 796:938 F.3d 553 774:896 F.3d 640 752:923 F.3d 680 623:. September 11, 2008 552:The case was titled 411:separation of powers 368:Congress passed the 313:separation of powers 1433:Removal by Congress 1280:Removal of Officers 1170:Recess Appointments 1092:Auffmordt v. Hedden 393:Treasury Department 362:prime interest rate 977:Marbury v. Madison 791:Collins v. Mnuchin 769:Collins v. Mnuchin 554:Collins v. Mnuchin 186:Associate Justices 121:Collins v. Mnuchin 1545: 1544: 1541: 1540: 1510: 1509: 1455: 1454: 1451: 1450: 1422:Collins v. Yellen 1414:Selia Law v. CFPB 1398:Morrison v. Olson 1270: 1269: 1266: 1265: 1111:Inferior Officers 872:Collins v. Yellen 440:was heard in the 290:Collins v. Yellen 286: 285: 266:Gorsuch (in part) 234:Amy Coney Barrett 24:Collins v. Yellen 1585: 1516: 1461: 1441:Bowsher v. Synar 1347: 1276: 1240:Buckley v. Valeo 1127:Ex parte Siebold 1057: 962: 946: 939: 932: 923: 918: 912: 909: 903: 900: 894: 891: 885: 859: 858: 856: 854: 837: 831: 830: 828: 826: 809: 803: 793: 787: 781: 771: 765: 759: 749: 743: 737: 736: 734: 732: 710: 704: 703: 701: 699: 682: 673: 671: 648: 644: 639: 633: 632: 630: 628: 613: 604: 584: 565: 550: 518:Mark A. Calabria 171:Court membership 33: 32: 21: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1537: 1521: 1506: 1466: 1447: 1428: 1345: 1291:Ex parte Hennen 1281: 1262: 1211: 1184: 1165: 1106: 1055: 967: 956: 950: 916: 910: 907: 901: 898: 892: 889: 883: 867: 862: 852: 850: 839: 838: 834: 824: 822: 821:. June 23, 2021 811: 810: 806: 789: 788: 784: 767: 766: 762: 745: 744: 740: 730: 728: 712: 711: 707: 697: 695: 684: 683: 676: 669: 646: 640: 636: 626: 624: 615: 614: 607: 603:___ (2020). 585: 578: 574: 569: 568: 551: 547: 542: 530: 510: 498:Sonia Sotomayor 486:Clarence Thomas 466: 342: 336: 226:Brett Kavanaugh 224: 212: 210:Sonia Sotomayor 200: 190:Clarence Thomas 165: 145:(5th Cir. 2019) 66: 44: 38: 19: 12: 11: 5: 1591: 1589: 1581: 1580: 1575: 1570: 1565: 1560: 1550: 1549: 1543: 1542: 1539: 1538: 1536: 1535: 1526: 1523: 1522: 1519: 1512: 1511: 1508: 1507: 1505: 1504: 1496: 1488: 1480: 1471: 1468: 1467: 1464: 1457: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1449: 1448: 1446: 1445: 1436: 1434: 1430: 1429: 1427: 1426: 1418: 1410: 1402: 1394: 1386: 1378: 1370: 1362: 1353: 1351: 1344: 1343: 1335: 1327: 1319: 1311: 1303: 1295: 1286: 1283: 1282: 1279: 1272: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1264: 1263: 1261: 1260: 1252: 1244: 1236: 1228: 1219: 1217: 1213: 1212: 1210: 1209: 1201: 1192: 1190: 1186: 1185: 1183: 1182: 1173: 1171: 1167: 1166: 1164: 1163: 1155: 1147: 1139: 1131: 1123: 1114: 1112: 1108: 1107: 1105: 1104: 1096: 1088: 1080: 1072: 1063: 1061: 1054: 1053: 1045: 1037: 1029: 1021: 1013: 1005: 997: 989: 981: 972: 969: 968: 965: 958: 957: 951: 949: 948: 941: 934: 926: 920: 919: 887:Google Scholar 866: 865:External links 863: 861: 860: 832: 804: 782: 760: 738: 705: 674: 658:H.R. 3221 651:110–289 (text) 634: 605: 575: 573: 570: 567: 566: 562:Steven Mnuchin 544: 543: 541: 538: 537: 536: 529: 526: 509: 506: 502:Stephen Breyer 465: 462: 451:Both sides of 335: 332: 284: 283: 280: 279:Concur/dissent 276: 275: 272: 268: 267: 264: 260: 259: 256: 252: 251: 248: 244: 243: 239: 238: 237: 236: 198:Stephen Breyer 187: 184: 179: 173: 172: 168: 167: 160: 159: 155: 154: 153: 152: 146: 135: 117: 98: 94: 93: 89: 88: 75: 71: 70: 61: 57: 56: 51: 50:Full case name 47: 46: 40: 39: 34: 26: 25: 17: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1590: 1579: 1576: 1574: 1571: 1569: 1566: 1564: 1561: 1559: 1556: 1555: 1553: 1533: 1532: 1528: 1527: 1524: 1517: 1513: 1502: 1501: 1497: 1494: 1493: 1489: 1486: 1485: 1481: 1478: 1477: 1473: 1472: 1469: 1462: 1458: 1443: 1442: 1438: 1437: 1435: 1431: 1424: 1423: 1419: 1416: 1415: 1411: 1408: 1407: 1403: 1400: 1399: 1395: 1392: 1391: 1387: 1384: 1383: 1379: 1376: 1375: 1371: 1368: 1367: 1363: 1360: 1359: 1355: 1354: 1352: 1348: 1341: 1340: 1336: 1333: 1332: 1328: 1325: 1324: 1320: 1317: 1316: 1312: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1301: 1300: 1296: 1293: 1292: 1288: 1287: 1284: 1277: 1273: 1258: 1257: 1253: 1250: 1249: 1245: 1242: 1241: 1237: 1234: 1233: 1229: 1226: 1225: 1221: 1220: 1218: 1214: 1207: 1206: 1202: 1199: 1198: 1194: 1193: 1191: 1187: 1180: 1179: 1175: 1174: 1172: 1168: 1161: 1160: 1156: 1153: 1152: 1148: 1145: 1144: 1140: 1137: 1136: 1132: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1121: 1120: 1116: 1115: 1113: 1109: 1102: 1101: 1097: 1094: 1093: 1089: 1086: 1085: 1081: 1078: 1077: 1073: 1070: 1069: 1065: 1064: 1062: 1058: 1051: 1050: 1046: 1043: 1042: 1038: 1035: 1034: 1030: 1027: 1026: 1022: 1019: 1018: 1014: 1011: 1010: 1006: 1003: 1002: 998: 995: 994: 990: 987: 986: 982: 979: 978: 974: 973: 970: 963: 959: 954: 947: 942: 940: 935: 933: 928: 927: 924: 915: 906: 897: 888: 881: 877: 873: 869: 868: 864: 849: 848: 843: 836: 833: 820: 819: 814: 808: 805: 801: 797: 792: 786: 783: 779: 775: 770: 764: 761: 757: 753: 748: 742: 739: 726: 722: 721: 716: 709: 706: 694: 693: 688: 681: 679: 675: 670:July 30, 2008 667: 663: 659: 655: 652: 645: 638: 635: 627:September 11, 622: 621:The Economist 618: 612: 610: 606: 602: 598: 594: 590: 589: 583: 581: 577: 571: 563: 559: 555: 549: 546: 539: 535: 532: 531: 527: 525: 523: 519: 515: 507: 505: 503: 499: 495: 491: 487: 483: 478: 475: 469: 464:Supreme Court 463: 461: 459: 454: 449: 447: 443: 442:Fifth Circuit 439: 435: 434:Ninth Circuit 431: 427: 423: 419: 417: 412: 408: 404: 403: 397: 394: 389: 387: 383: 379: 375: 371: 366: 363: 359: 356:, for-profit 355: 351: 347: 341: 333: 331: 329: 325: 320: 318: 314: 310: 306: 305: 300: 296: 292: 291: 281: 277: 273: 269: 265: 261: 257: 253: 249: 245: 242:Case opinions 240: 235: 231: 227: 223: 219: 215: 211: 207: 203: 199: 195: 191: 188: 185: 183: 180: 178:Chief Justice 177: 176: 174: 169: 161: 156: 150: 147: 144: 140: 137:On rehearing 136: 133: 129: 126: 122: 118: 115: 111: 108: 104: 101: 100: 99: 95: 90: 86: 85: 80: 76: 72: 69: 65: 62: 58: 55: 52: 48: 41: 37: 27: 22: 16: 1529: 1520:Ratification 1498: 1490: 1482: 1474: 1439: 1421: 1420: 1412: 1404: 1396: 1388: 1380: 1372: 1364: 1356: 1337: 1329: 1321: 1313: 1305: 1297: 1289: 1254: 1248:MWAA v. CAAN 1246: 1238: 1230: 1222: 1205:Carr v. Saul 1203: 1195: 1176: 1157: 1151:Lucia v. SEC 1149: 1141: 1133: 1125: 1117: 1098: 1090: 1082: 1074: 1066: 1047: 1039: 1031: 1023: 1015: 1007: 999: 991: 983: 975: 871: 851:. Retrieved 845: 835: 823:. Retrieved 816: 807: 790: 785: 768: 763: 746: 741: 729:. Retrieved 718: 708: 696:. Retrieved 690: 637: 625:. Retrieved 620: 586: 558:Janet Yellen 553: 548: 522:Donald Trump 511: 490:Neil Gorsuch 482:Samuel Alito 479: 473: 470: 467: 457: 452: 450: 445: 437: 429: 425: 421: 420: 400: 398: 390: 367: 343: 323: 321: 302: 289: 288: 287: 229: 222:Neil Gorsuch 217: 205: 202:Samuel Alito 193: 182:John Roberts 120: 102: 92:Case history 82: 53: 15: 802: 2019). 780: 2018). 758: 2019). 698:December 9, 660:, 122  494:Elena Kagan 380:(FHFB) and 354:Freddie Mac 271:Concurrence 263:Concurrence 255:Concurrence 214:Elena Kagan 141:, 938 F.3d 107:F. Supp. 3d 60:Docket nos. 1552:Categories 668:, enacted 591:, No. 572:References 350:Fannie Mae 338:See also: 334:Background 560:replaced 514:Joe Biden 474:Seila Law 458:Seila Law 430:Seila Law 422:Seila Law 416:severable 324:Seila Law 319:in 2008. 114:S.D. Tex. 74:Citations 955:case law 870:Text of 853:June 23, 825:June 23, 800:5th Cir. 778:5th Cir. 756:9th Cir. 731:June 29, 725:Archived 528:See also 480:Justice 247:Majority 132:5th Cir. 643:Pub. L. 453:Collins 446:en banc 438:Collins 426:Collins 158:Holding 139:en banc 1534:(1994) 1503:(2023) 1495:(2012) 1487:(2010) 1479:(1994) 1444:(1986) 1425:(2021) 1417:(2020) 1409:(2010) 1401:(1988) 1393:(1958) 1385:(1936) 1377:(1926) 1369:(1897) 1361:(1886) 1342:(1903) 1334:(1901) 1326:(1900) 1318:(1891) 1310:(1890) 1302:(1880) 1294:(1839) 1259:(1994) 1251:(1991) 1243:(1976) 1235:(1928) 1227:(1893) 1208:(2021) 1200:(1995) 1181:(2014) 1162:(2021) 1154:(2018) 1146:(1997) 1138:(1991) 1130:(1879) 1122:(1878) 1103:(1920) 1095:(1890) 1087:(1888) 1079:(1888) 1071:(1867) 1052:(2020) 1044:(2018) 1036:(2017) 1028:(1932) 1020:(1900) 1012:(1898) 1004:(1885) 996:(1878) 988:(1856) 980:(1803) 917:  911:  908:  902:  899:  896:Justia 893:  890:  884:  798: ( 794:, 776: ( 772:, 754: ( 750:, 664:  649:  595:, 556:until 508:Impact 492:, and 258:Thomas 232: 230:· 228:  220: 218:· 216:  208: 206:· 204:  196: 194:· 192:  123:, 896 105:, 254 68:19-563 64:19-422 878: 662:Stat. 654:(PDF) 599: 540:Notes 134:2018) 116:2017) 97:Prior 81:___ ( 880:U.S. 855:2021 827:2021 818:CNBC 733:2020 720:CNBC 700:2020 666:2654 629:2008 601:U.S. 593:19-7 352:and 149:Cert 125:F.3d 84:more 79:U.S. 77:594 876:594 847:CNN 597:591 143:553 128:640 110:841 1554:: 874:, 844:. 815:. 723:. 717:. 689:. 677:^ 656:, 619:. 608:^ 579:^ 504:. 488:, 428:. 330:. 945:e 938:t 931:v 857:. 829:. 735:. 702:. 672:. 631:. 130:( 112:( 87:)

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
19-422
19-563
U.S.
more
F. Supp. 3d
841
S.D. Tex.
F.3d
640
5th Cir.
en banc
553
Cert
John Roberts
Clarence Thomas
Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett
United States Supreme Court
Federal Housing Finance Agency
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
separation of powers
federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.