Trump Regime

Mick Mulvaney Sides Against His Own Agency in Court

JM Ashby
Written by JM Ashby

Mick Mulvaney is ostensibly the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), but Mulvaney has sided against the agency he supposedly directs in court.

Mulvaney signed a joint motion with payday lenders who are asking a federal judge to indefinitely delay new rules for payday lenders until after the industry lawsuit against the rules is complete.

In a joint motion filed late last week in federal court in Austin, Tex., Mick Mulvaney, the bureau’s acting director, sided with two industry trade groups suing the agency. The bureau asked a judge to delay the rules until after the industry groups’ lawsuit is resolved, which may take years.

By then, the entire issue could be moot: Mr. Mulvaney has said he intends for the bureau to reconsider, and perhaps repeal, the rules. To do that, the agency has to follow a formal administrative process, which it has said it plans to begin by February.

Why would Mulvaney sign on to this motion rather than simply repeal the rules?

Repealing the rules is part of his plan, but he can't do it tomorrow. Federal regulations cannot be repealed on a whim and must go through a review process through which new rules can be proposed, commented on by the public, and ultimately implemented.

Mulvaney can't unilaterally repeal or delay rules for payday lenders (who have donated to his campaigns), but he can ask a judge to do it for him.

With any luck, the court will see this for exactly what it is, but the lawsuit was filed in Texas so I'm not necessarily optimistic.

  • Scopedog

    Prick Mulvaney strikes again.

    Lord, I hope that when this Administration goes down, Mulvaney goes to prison–but I know you can’t jail someone for being a complete asshole.

  • ninjaf

    Repealing the rules is part of his plan, but he can’t do it tomorrow. Federal regulations cannot be repealed on a whim and must go through a review process through which new rules can be proposed, commented on by the public, and ultimately implemented.

    Plus, if the rules are given a chance to be implemented and the industry doesn’t collapse (and makes slightly less money) and consumers are used to the protections, that will make it all the harder to justify the changes, either politically or even legally when the repeals are challenged in court.

  • Ceoltoir

    Remember this when the wheels come off the national economy and the republicans are all trying to blame everyone else for the mess.

  • Username1016

    Does he have standing to join the side AGAINST his agency in a lawsuit? That makes no sense.

  • Aynwrong

    I honestly don’t understand how Republican voters don’t get this or why they would pretend not to. The purpose of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is spelled out right there in the title. But no matter how clear a Republican’s intentions to do the opposite is they just keep blurting out nonsense about socialism and “too much government.” Then when their finances haven’t been protected they just blame “the libs.”

    • Draxiar

      Facts don’t pair well with their FOX-Breitbart-Drudge ideology.

  • muselet

    It figures Mick Mulvaney would take the side of the usurers over that of consumers. This is, after all, the man who disbanded the Consumer Advisory Board, described by TPM as “basically the only group of outside experts that the CFPB director is required to interact with by law.”

    We can expect more shenanigans like this as long as Donald Trump and his merry band of Visigoths are in power.

    –alopecia