2026

In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Regulatory Oversight, Chris Willis is joined by colleagues Lori Sommerfield and Matthew Berns to discuss New Jersey’s sweeping new disparate impact regulations under the Law Against Discrimination. They break down one of the most comprehensive state-level disparate impact rules in the U.S., the contrasts with traditional federal standards, and implications for enforcement in financial services. The discussion dives into credit scores, underwriting models, AI and automated decision-making tools, and the difference between New Jersey’s approach and the Trump administration’s effort to scale back disparate impact at the federal level, offering practical takeaways for lenders and other covered entities navigating this shifting landscape.

In this episode of Moving the Metal, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso are joined by Troutman colleagues Chris Carlson and Nam Kang from the firm’s RISE Practice Group to unpack what “Trump 2.0” really means for dealers and auto finance companies. With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other federal regulators pulling back, the group explains how state attorneys general (AGs) and state financial regulators are rapidly filling the void — often led by former CFPB staff now embedded in state offices — and why that creates a complex patchwork of unfair or deceptive acts or practices standards and enforcement approaches across 50 states. They discuss hot-button themes like affordability, junk fees, mini-CFPBs, and the growing role of state working groups, as well as how state AGs are leveraging prior CFPB theories, the California CARS rule, and copy‑and‑paste complaints.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have rescheduled their joint event, “SEC – CFTC Harmonization: U.S. Financial Leadership in the Crypto Era.” Originally planned for January 27, the program will now take place on Thursday, January 29, from 2:00 – 3:00 p.m. ET at CFTC headquarters in Washington, D.C.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis is joined by his colleague Lou Manetti from the firm’s Chicago office to unpack a significant new Illinois Supreme Court decision on standing in consumer cases based on federal statutes. Chris and Lou walk through the court’s FCRA “receipt truncation” ruling, explaining how Illinois — long thought to have more generous standing rules than federal court — has now imported a “concrete injury” requirement for common-law standing where the statute does not expressly confer a right to sue. The discussion compares Illinois’ approach to federal Article III jurisprudence and explores how the court distinguished between statutory and common-law standing, why FCRA did not qualify for statutory standing, and what counts (and doesn’t count) as a concrete injury. Lou also outlines the practical implications for FCRA, FDCPA, TILA, and RESPA litigation in Illinois state courts, including the reduced payoff from forum shopping after federal standing dismissals and new avenues for defense motions challenging bare procedural violation cases that lack real-world harm.

In this episode of FCRA Focus, host Dave Gettings is joined by Troutman colleagues Cindy Hanson and Noah DiPasquale for a deep dive into reseller litigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The trio breaks down what a “reseller” is under 15 U.S.C. 1681a(u), how resellers function as intermediaries between originating consumer reporting agencies and end users, and why that limited role matters when evaluating claims under 1681e(b) and 1681i. They discuss recent case law on reasonable procedures, the impact of 1681i(f)’s limited dispute obligations, and practical litigation strategies, including leveraging industry standards, expert testimony, and arguments against double recovery under the one-satisfaction rule and setoff.

On January 12, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) issued a second invitation for comments on potential regulations under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL) that would require registration and reporting by firms engaged in consumer reporting and related data activities. Comments are due by February 26.