State National Bank of Big Spring, Texas won’t back down easily.
The bank continues to try and weigh in on the landmark case between PHH and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Despite motions from other parties being denied, Competitive Enterprise Institute General Counsel Sam Kazman said they are “cautiously optimistic” that their recent motion to intervene will be approved.
The CEI, which advocates for limited government, and the 60 Plus Association, a nonprofit that represents the interests of senior citizens, are also part of the State National Bank case.
“We want to make sure all the constitutional arguments are fleshed out in the PHH case,” said Kazman. “Our plaintiffs wouldn’t be satisfied by the head only being allowed to be removed from the president.”
Under the original PHH ruling, the CFPB authority structure would change and give the president of the United States the power to supervise the director of the CFPB. This would include the ability to replace the director as the president sees fit.
As a refresher, back in 2012, State National Bank filed suit against the federal government, claiming that the CFPB’s “unprecedented, unchecked power” violates the Constitution’s separation of powers.
In August 2013, after 11 states joined State National Bank’s lawsuit, it was tossed by a federal judge, who ruled that the bank did not have standing to sue.
The group didn’t give up and appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, eventually winning the appeal in July 2015 when the court ruled the case could move forward.
This is about where the State National Bank case starts to go into limbo and the PHH case starts to begin.
Check here for a more in-depth break down of the timeline.
