Regulatory: Implementation of Financial Reform Begins
Obama's decisions in regards to new federal agency will likely raise institutional issues.
September 28, 2010 at 08:00 PM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The first visible steps have been taken in the government's efforts to promulgate the hundreds of regulations that will be necessary to implement the financial institution reform legislation. The Administration has taken one major step, however, that seems destined to raise significant institutional issues in the implementation of the new law.
Among the first implementing rules to appear, on October 1st the Commodities Futures Trading Commission will propose a critical rule required by the statute, which will increase public visibility of the derivatives market by establishing time periods within which swap transactions must be reported to the government or to a swap depository. The rule also will define the principles governing operation of clearing houses and swap execution facilities. Similarly, the staff of the Federal Reserve Board has begun the consultation process with public interest groups and financial institutions that will be affected by the forthcoming rules by which banks will be regulated.
In a major and potentially contentious step, the Administration announced its plans for the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the most significant new federal agency created since the late 1970s. For the foreseeable future, the Bureau will operate as a headless agency. The President has decided to take advantage of a provision in the law that allows the Secretary of the Treasury to exercise the authority delegated to the Director of the Bureau until the first Director is confirmed. The President has selected Professor Elizabeth Warren to run the Bureau, but has neither nominated her nor given her a recess appointment as Director. Instead, Ms. Warren has been named to two other positions that do not require confirmation. She will serve as an Assistant to the President and as a Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury. Thus, the new agency will operate for a significant period of time without a confirmed official at its head.
This effort to work around the confirmation processes presents three issues. First, Congress created the Bureau as an independent, non-political agency that would not be subject to the direction of the White House or Treasury. However, for the foreseeable future the agency will be run by the White House, and the President's subordinates will make the critical decisions about the Bureau's policy priorities and the substance of its decisions.
Second, this arrangement makes future executive privilege battles unavoidable. Prior Administrations have carefully avoided situations in which Congress might be able to call members of the President's staff to testify about internal White House deliberations. With Ms. Warren's dual appointments, Congress will be able to subpoena her in her Treasury capacity, and she would be hard put to avoid testifying about decisions in which she participated. Thus, the only way the Administration will be able to prevent Congress from inquiring into the White House policy process is by invoking executive privilege and directing her not to appear.
Finally, if the headless agency persists for too long a period, entities adversely affected by a Bureau decision may challenge those substantive decisions on the ground that, by declining to nominate a Director, the White House de facto usurped authority that Congress delegated to an officer who would be independent of the President.
In sum, the new Bureau will begin life with significant institutional questions hanging over its head.
John F. Cooney is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Venable.
Read John Cooney's previous column. Read John Cooney's next column.
The first visible steps have been taken in the government's efforts to promulgate the hundreds of regulations that will be necessary to implement the financial institution reform legislation. The Administration has taken one major step, however, that seems destined to raise significant institutional issues in the implementation of the new law.
Among the first implementing rules to appear, on October 1st the Commodities Futures Trading Commission will propose a critical rule required by the statute, which will increase public visibility of the derivatives market by establishing time periods within which swap transactions must be reported to the government or to a swap depository. The rule also will define the principles governing operation of clearing houses and swap execution facilities. Similarly, the staff of the Federal Reserve Board has begun the consultation process with public interest groups and financial institutions that will be affected by the forthcoming rules by which banks will be regulated.
In a major and potentially contentious step, the Administration announced its plans for the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the most significant new federal agency created since the late 1970s. For the foreseeable future, the Bureau will operate as a headless agency. The President has decided to take advantage of a provision in the law that allows the Secretary of the Treasury to exercise the authority delegated to the Director of the Bureau until the first Director is confirmed. The President has selected Professor Elizabeth Warren to run the Bureau, but has neither nominated her nor given her a recess appointment as Director. Instead, Ms. Warren has been named to two other positions that do not require confirmation. She will serve as an Assistant to the President and as a Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury. Thus, the new agency will operate for a significant period of time without a confirmed official at its head.
This effort to work around the confirmation processes presents three issues. First, Congress created the Bureau as an independent, non-political agency that would not be subject to the direction of the White House or Treasury. However, for the foreseeable future the agency will be run by the White House, and the President's subordinates will make the critical decisions about the Bureau's policy priorities and the substance of its decisions.
Second, this arrangement makes future executive privilege battles unavoidable. Prior Administrations have carefully avoided situations in which Congress might be able to call members of the President's staff to testify about internal White House deliberations. With Ms. Warren's dual appointments, Congress will be able to subpoena her in her Treasury capacity, and she would be hard put to avoid testifying about decisions in which she participated. Thus, the only way the Administration will be able to prevent Congress from inquiring into the White House policy process is by invoking executive privilege and directing her not to appear.
Finally, if the headless agency persists for too long a period, entities adversely affected by a Bureau decision may challenge those substantive decisions on the ground that, by declining to nominate a Director, the White House de facto usurped authority that Congress delegated to an officer who would be independent of the President.
In sum, the new Bureau will begin life with significant institutional questions hanging over its head.
John F. Cooney is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of
Read John Cooney's previous column. Read John Cooney's next column.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBest Practices for Adopting and Adapting to AI: Mitigating Risk in Light of Increasing Regulatory and Shareholder Scrutiny
7 minute readCrypto Groups Sue IRS Over Decentralized Finance Reporting Rule
SEC Penalizes Wells Fargo, LPL Financial $900,000 Each for Inaccurate Trading Data
US Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Trending Stories
- 1The Importance of Contractual Language in Analyzing Post-Closing Earnout Disputes
- 2People in the News—Jan. 8, 2025—Stevens & Lee, Ogletree Deakins
- 3How I Made Partner: 'Avoid Getting Stuck in a Moment,' Says Federico Cuadra Del Carmen of Baker McKenzie
- 4Legal Departments Dinged for Acquiescing to Rate Hikes That 'Defy Gravity'
- 5Spalding Jurors Return $12M Verdict Against State Farm Insurance Client
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250