Opinion and Order in Support of Plaintiffs' Claims

Plaintiffs sue the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and its director, Rohit Chopra, seeking relief from the agency’s direction that its examiners must scrutinize companies for discrimination against unspecified protected classes and for how well companies introspect about statistical disparities in data concerning their business practices. Plaintiffs allege that the new examination directive must be vacated because the agency’s funding structure violates the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution, because it exceeds the agency’s statutory authority, and because it violates the Administrative Procedure Act substantively and procedurally.

Plaintiffs move for summary judgment in their favor on all claims. Defendants move to dismiss the case or, alternatively, for summary judgment in their favor on the non-constitutional claims. For the reasons given below, plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted, and defendants’ motions are denied.

Download to read the full text.