Mick Mulvaney Tells State AGs the CFPB Won't 'Get in Your Way'
"If we think it's a good case, we'll bring it. If not, we're happy to get out of the way and let you all do it by yourselves," Mick Mulvaney, the acting Consumer Financial Protection Bureau director, told state attorneys general Wednesday in Washington.
February 28, 2018 at 05:00 PM
4 minute read
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), testifies before the Senate Budget Committee on February 13, 2018. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi/ ALM
Since taking over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last year, White House budget director Mick Mulvaney has not hidden his dissatisfaction with the agency's enforcement record.
Mulvaney declared an end to the days of “pushing the envelope.” He signaled, in a strategic plan released this month, that the agency would make lighter use of perhaps the most powerful weapon in its enforcement arsenal: the authority to police “unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices.” In industry jargon, that's “UDAAP” for short.
But there is only so much Mulvaney, or any leader of the CFPB, can do to pull back on those enforcement efforts. The Dodd-Frank Act, which created the CFPB, also handed state attorneys general the power to claim violations of that federal law's prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices.
That authority has become particularly meaningful at a time when state attorneys general are taking steps to pick up any slack left by federal regulators under the Trump administration. On Wednesday, with Mulvaney appearing at the winter meeting of the National Association of Attorneys General, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro pressed for the CFPB to not interfere with any states' efforts to bring claims under Dodd-Frank.
Josh Shapiro“I think it's important we continue to have that latitude to bring the cases that we think are important,” Shapiro said.
States are required to consult with the CFPB before bringing an enforcement action under Dodd-Frank, and the bureau is allowed to intervene. When asked about his philosophy toward states exerting their Dodd-Frank authority, Mulvaney appeared to endorse a hands-off approach, saying “we are not there to get in your way.”
“My interest has been whether or not we are going to spend our efforts on what I consider to be solid legal claims,” Mulvaney said. “I've been a little bit surprised at how hard we have pushed the envelope in a couple of circumstances. So I'm much more interested not in who's bringing the case but the merits of the case that we're bringing. If we think it's a good case, we'll bring it. If not, we're happy to get out of the way and let you all do it by yourselves.”
Shapiro's office in Pennsylvania has stepped up its attention to the financial industry since Trump took office. Last year, Shapiro launched a consumer financial protection unit that, he said, would “focus on lenders that prey on seniors, families with students, and military service members, including for-profit colleges and mortgage and student loan servicers.”
He chose a veteran of the CFPB, Nicholas Smyth, to lead the new unit. Smyth joined Shapiro's office from Reed Smith's Pittsburgh office.
State attorneys general in Connecticut, Florida, Illinois and Mississippi all filed lawsuits in 2014 using their Dodd-Frank authority.
In August 2017, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey included a Dodd-Frank claim in her office's lawsuit against the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Association, one of the largest servicers of student loans in the United States. The lawsuit, which is pending in Suffolk Superior Court, alleges PHEAA mismanaged federal loan forgiveness programs, sometimes by overcharging borrowers and preventing them from staying on track with repayment programs.
“Attorneys general, a core group of them, are interested in making sure they are in a position to bring enforcement actions and pursue investigations in the consumer financial services area,” said Venable partner Allyson Baker, a former CFPB enforcement attorney. “And there's no doubt there's a huge uptick in that space.”
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
© 2024 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 AllPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
‘A Force of Nature’: Littler Mendelson Shareholder Michael Lotito Dies At 76
3 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Tuesday Newspaper
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-85
- 3Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 4Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 5Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
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