A U.S. district court judge in the Central District of California defended the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after rejecting multiple challenges to the bureau’s authority to issue civil investigative demands (CID),according to a blog by James Kim and Daniel Delnero, published in the CFPB Monitor.
The decision comes amid a growing amount of cases disputing the constitutionality of the bureau, which includes the landmark case between the CFPB and PHH that started oral arguments this week.
The blog explained that the judge ordered the defendant, Future Income Payments, to comply with a CID within fifteen days of the decision after the company previously attempted a John Doe challenge to the CID in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
From the blog:
The opinion is a reminder of the CFPB’s broad authority to issue a CID and the heavy burden a recipient bears of challenging it. The court joined other courts in emphasizing that an agency subpoena is valid unless jurisdiction is “plainly lacking.” Under this standard, a CID will be upheld if “there is some plausible ground for jurisdiction.”
Constitutional issues aside, the primary takeaway is that companies should think strategically when they receive a CID.
Posted in Uncategorized
For years, consumers have warred with telemarketers for ringing their landline phones at all hours of the day.
Pretty soon, though, they might find their mobile voicemail under the same sort of assault — that is, if the U.S. Republican Party and others have their way.
The GOP’s leading campaign and fundraising arm, the Republican National Committee, has quietly thrown its support behind a proposal at the Federal Communications Commission that would pave the way for marketers to auto-dial consumers’ cellphones and leave them prerecorded voicemail messages — all without ever causing their devices to ring.
Under current federal law, telemarketers and others, like political groups, aren’t allowed to launch robocall campaigns targeting cellphones unless they first obtain a consumer’s written consent.
But businesses stress that it’s a different story when it comes to “ringless voicemail” — because it technically doesn’t qualify as a phone call in the first place. In their eyes, that means they shouldn’t need a customer or voter’s permission if they want to auto-dial mobile voicemail inboxes in bulk pre-made messages about a political candidate, product or cause. And they want the FCC to rule, once and for all, that they’re in the clear.