Photo of Chris Willis

Chris Willis

Subscribe to Chris Willis's Posts

Chris is the co-leader of the Consumer Financial Services Regulatory practice at the firm. He advises financial services institutions facing state and federal government investigations and examinations, counseling them on compliance issues including UDAP/UDAAP, credit reporting, debt collection, and fair lending, and defending them in individual and class action lawsuits brought by consumers and enforcement actions brought by government agencies.

Follow:Read more about Chris WillisChris's Linkedin Profile

Today, another significant decision was issued in the ongoing battle over the fate of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau). In National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) v. Vought, the D.C. federal district court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to clarify the existing preliminary injunction and squarely rejected the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel’s (OLC) interpretation of the CFPB’s funding statute. In so holding, the ruling makes clear that the CFPB cannot justify noncompliance with the court’s existing preliminary injunction by declining to request funds from the Federal Reserve.

On December 19, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed Senate Bill S1353A creating a new General Business Law article on “actions involving coerced debts.” The law is aimed squarely at survivors of domestic violence, trafficking, and other forms of economic abuse who find themselves saddled with credit card balances, loans, or other consumer debts they never truly agreed to incur. Once effective (90 days after signing), it will prohibit creditors from enforcing certain coerced consumer debts against victims, create a structured process for disputing those debts, and establish robust private rights of action and defenses against collection. New York becomes the eighth state to enact protections of this kind.

As reported by Bloomberg here, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) is moving to withdraw a 2023 Biden-era joint statement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that warned lenders against overbroad use of immigration status in credit decisions. The notice, submitted to the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), ties together two hallmark priorities of the current Trump administration: a harder line on immigration and a continued effort to scale back fair lending enforcement. While the underlying Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) remains unchanged, the move signals a sharp shift in how the CFPB and DOJ are likely to interpret and enforce its protections for noncitizen borrowers.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released a new market “data spotlight” on Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) that uses actual transaction data from six large providers of “pay-in-four” BNPL loans. The report paints a picture of growing adoption paired with improving credit performance: late fees fell and charge-off rates declined in 2023, even as the number of loans and users rose.

On December 17, New Jersey announced its adoption of what its Attorney General is calling the “most comprehensive state-level disparate impact regulations in the country.” Effective December 15, 2025, the Division on Civil Rights’ (DCR) new rules under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) codify guidance on disparate impact discrimination across housing, lending, employment, places of public accommodation, and contracting.

As we discussed in our prior post on National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau), on August 15 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a decision vacating the district court’s preliminary injunction, which had previously restricted the CFPB’s actions to halt the Bureau’s operations and terminate its employees. The court of appeals held that most of the employees’ claims belonged in the Civil Service Reform Act regime and that the remaining claims did not target reviewable final agency action or equitable claims.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis is joined by Troutman Pepper Locke Partner Lori Sommerfield and Charles River Associates VP and Practice Leader of Financial Economics Marsha Courchane to discuss the current administration’s “debanking” initiative established through Executive Order 14331. They discuss key actions taken by federal agencies to implement it, expectations for financial institutions and small business lenders to conduct internal reviews, regulatory reporting deadlines, and consequences for noncompliance. This episode also features practical tips on tools and technology that institutions/small business lenders can use to facilitate conducting debanking reviews and highlights the tension between the debanking initiative and financial institutions’ need to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act and other federal anti-money laundering laws.

On December 11, the White House issued an Executive Order (EO) titled Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI). The EO states a federal policy to sustain and enhance U.S. AI leadership through a minimally burdensome national policy framework and to limit conflicting state requirements. It directs rapid actions by multiple federal entities to evaluate, challenge, or preempt state AI laws viewed as inconsistent with that policy and to use federal funding and standard-setting to influence state approaches.

On December 10, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released preliminary findings from its supervisory review of “debanking” activities at the nine largest national banks. The objective of the review was to determine whether the banks debanked or discriminated against any customers or potential customers on the basis of their political or religious beliefs or lawful business activities. The review, which was required to be completed by the OCC and other federal banking agencies by December 5 pursuant to Executive Order 14331 (Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans), covers the period 2020–2025.

In two recent litigation status reports, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) indicated that it is working to issue interim final rules for both Section 1071 and Section 1033 in light of an opinion from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) concluding that the Bureau cannot lawfully draw funds from the Federal Reserve Board at this time. Specifically, as discussed here, the OLC concluded that the Federal Reserve System presently has no “combined earnings” from which the CFPB may lawfully draw funds under the Dodd‑Frank Act, and the CFPB has publicly stated it anticipates having sufficient funds to continue normal operations through at least December 31, 2025.