Do Arbitrators Follow the Law? A New Study Provides Data, But the Debate Continues
Consumer Finance Monitor
Today’s episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast is centered around a novel and thought-provoking article by David Horton, a professor of law at the University of California, Davis. The article, titled "Do Arbitrators Follow the Law? Evidence from Clause Construction," dives into the intriguing question of whether arbitrators render decisions that align with judicial rulings. Horton explores the longstanding debate on arbitration's adherence to legal standards, focusing on whether arbitrators have followed the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (2019) that...
info_outline
Student Lending Legislation and Litigation: 2025 Mid-Year Review
Consumer Finance Monitor
Today on our podcast, we’re releasing a repurposed recording of our July 23, 2025 webinar titled “Student Lending Legislation and Litigation: 2025 Mid-Year Review.” The webinar features esteemed partners John Culhane and Tom Burke, who dive into the intricacies of student lending litigation and regulatory developments. As a senior partner in the Consumer Financial Services Group, John Culhane shares his extensive knowledge on higher education finance, focusing on state legislation and private student loan litigation. Tom Burke, also a partner in the same group, brings his expertise in...
info_outline
The Legality of Trump’s Terminations Without Cause of Members and Commissioners of Federal “Independent” Agencies
Consumer Finance Monitor
Today’s episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast offers an in-depth analysis of the unitary executive theory and its implications for terminations by President Trump of the Democratic members/commissioners of several so-called independent Federal agencies. The episode features Lev Menand, an associate professor of law at Columbia Law School, who provides expert insights into financial institutions and administrative law and the validity of the Trump terminations. Professor Menand discusses the theory that President Trump may exercise complete control over independent federal...
info_outline
Loper Bright Enterprises One Year Later: The Practical Impact on Business, Consumers and Federal Agencies
Consumer Finance Monitor
Our podcast show being released today commemorates the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises - the opinion in which the Court overturned the Chevron Deference Doctrine. The Chevron Deference Doctrine stems from the Supreme Court's 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. The decision basically held that if federal legislation is ambiguous the courts must defer to the regulatory agency's interpretation if the regulation is reasonable. My primary goal was to identify a person who would be universally considered one...
info_outline
The Hidden Costs of Financial Services: Consumer Complaints and Financial Restitution
Consumer Finance Monitor
We are releasing today a very interesting podcast show which is also breaking news. Before I read an article by Professor Charlotte Haendler of Southern Methodist University and Professor Rawley Z. Heimer of Arizona State University titled I never knew that the CFPB authorized outside third-parties access to non-public data collected about consumer complaints that it received so that those third-parties could conduct studies. Professors Haendler and Heimer used that data to determine the demographics of complainants who received the most restitution versus the demographics of those who...
info_outline
Legislating for the Future
Consumer Finance Monitor
The podcast show we are releasing today features Professor Jonathan Gould of University of California (Berkeley) Law School who discusses his recent article co-written with Professor Rory Van Loo of Boston University School of Law which was recently published in the University of Chicago Law Review titled . The introduction of the article describes “legislating for the future” as follows: Public policy must address threats that will manifest in the future. Legislation enacted today affects the severity of tomorrow’s harms arising from biotechnology, climate change, and artificial...
info_outline
Can the President Remove Governors of Federal Independent Agencies Without Cause?
Consumer Finance Monitor
The podcast show we are releasing this week focuses generally on the so-called “Unitary Executive Theory” and specifically on the legality of President Trump firing without cause the Democratic Commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission and the members of other independent agencies, despite language in the governing statutes that prohibit the President from firing a member without cause and a 1935 Supreme Court opinion in Humphrey’s Executor holding that the firing of an FTC Commissioner by the President is unlawful if done without cause. Our guest is Patrick Sobkowski who teaches...
info_outline
Aspen Institute Seems to be Making Great Strides in Fixing Our Online Scams Problem
Consumer Finance Monitor
The genesis of the podcast show we are releasing today was an article written by Nick Bourke titled “” published on April 12, 2025 in Open Banker. We learned from that article about the great work being done by Aspen Institute’s National Task Force on Fraud and Scam Prevention. The purpose of the podcast is to describe the work of this Task Force The Aspen Institute states the following about the Task Force: Every day, criminals steal $430 million from American families, with total fraud proceeds reaching $158 billion annually. They are a critical funding source for transnational...
info_outline
What is Happening at the Federal Agencies That is Relevant to the Residential Mortgage and Settlement Service Industries
Consumer Finance Monitor
We are releasing today on our podcast show a repurposed webinar that we produced on June 11, 2025 entitled “What is happening at the federal agencies that is relevant to the residential mortgage and settlement service industries.” During this podcast, we will inform you about recent developments at federal agencies, including the CFPB, HUD/FHA, OCC, FDIC, FRB and USDA (collectively, the “Agencies”), as well as Congress, the White House, states and the courts. Some of the issues we consider are: • Changes in leadership and priorities at the CFPB, as...
info_outline
The Impact of the Newly Established Priorities and Massive Proposed Reduction in Force (RIF) on CFPB Enforcement (Part 2)
Consumer Finance Monitor
Our podcast show being released today is Part 2 of our two-part series featuring two former CFPB senior officers who were key employees in the Enforcement Division under prior directors: Eric Halperin and Craig Cowie. Eric Halperin served as the Enforcement Director at the CFPB from 2010 until former Director, Rohit Chopra, was terminated by President Trump. Craig Cowie was an enforcement attorney at the CFPB from July 2012 until April 2015 and then Assistant Litigation Deputy at the CFPB until June 2018. of our two-part series was released last Thursday, June 12. The purpose of these...
info_outlineThe podcast show we are releasing today features Professor Jonathan Gould of University of California (Berkeley) Law School who discusses his recent article co-written with Professor Rory Van Loo of Boston University School of Law which was recently published in the University of Chicago Law Review titled “Legislating for the Future”.
The introduction of the article describes “legislating for the future” as follows:
Public policy must address threats that will manifest in the future. Legislation enacted today affects the severity of tomorrow’s harms arising from biotechnology, climate change, and artificial intelligence. This Essay focuses on Congress’s capacity to confront future threats. It uses a detailed case study of financial crises to show the limits and possibilities of legislation to prevent future catastrophes. By paying insufficient attention to Congress, the existing literature does not recognize the full nature and extent of the institutional challenges in regulating systemic risk. Fully recognizing those challenges reveals important design insights for future-risk legislation.
During the podcast, we discuss the dynamics around enacting legislation through Congress that aims to increase the stability of the financial system and prevent financial crises. We discuss with Professor Gould about why passing this sort of legislation is so difficult and what Congress might be able to do about that.
We consider the following questions:
1. What are the basic dynamics that make it so hard to pass financial stability legislation?
2. How does the structure of Congress affect the difficulty of passing financial stability legislation?
3. We have seen some big bills lately, like Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act and the big taxing and spending bill from Trump this year. Why is financial regulation harder to enact than these other types of legislation?
4. Has it gotten easier or harder over time to enact financial regulation?
5. What happens after financial stability legislation is enacted?
6. What can Congress do to enhance its capacity in this area?
7. What types of legislative drafting techniques are likely to be especially promising?
8. What role is there for federal agencies to play in augmenting congressional capacity?
9. What role is there for states or private plaintiffs to play in augmenting congressional capacity?
10. What relevance does this all have beyond financial regulation?
11. In light of the fact that the article was published before the 2024 election and change in administration are any of Professor Gould’s conclusions altered by more recent events?
This podcast was hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, the founder and former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel of the Consumer Financial Services Group.