Photo of Stefanie Jackman

Stefanie Jackman

Subscribe to Stefanie Jackman's Posts

Stefanie takes a holistic approach to working with clients both through compliance counseling and assessment relating to consumer products and services, as well as serving as a zealous advocate in government inquiries, investigations, and consumer litigation.

Follow:Read more about Stefanie JackmanStefanie's Linkedin Profile

On May 21, a panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard argument in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services on whether text messages are covered as “telephone calls” in § 227(c)(5) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). While questions asked by judges during oral arguments are no guarantee of how the court will ultimately rule, Judge Thomas K. Kirsch II and Judge Doris L. Pryor appeared skeptical of the plaintiff’s position that Congress intended “telephone call” to include text messaging in 1991. Judge Nancy L. Maldonado did not ask any questions. While we will need to wait for the decision, there is an excellent chance that the panel will hold that plaintiffs cannot sue over marketing text messages under § 227(c)(5), creating a potential circuit split with the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Howard v. Republican National Committee that will need to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

On May 15, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) finalized two closely linked rules on mortgage escrow accounts that respond directly to the issues we discussed in our recent post, Second Circuit on Remand in Cantero: New York Escrow-Interest Law Is Preempted, Over a Vigorous Dissent. In that decision, the Second Circuit held that New York’s 2% interest‑on‑escrow statute is preempted as applied to national banks under the Barnett Bank standard, deepening a circuit split with the First and Ninth Circuits. The OCC’s new rules both adopt the Second Circuit’s view of the underlying bank powers and attempt to bring regulatory clarity to the interest‑on‑escrow preemption question for OCC‑regulated institutions nationwide.

Yesterday, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced the appointment of Rohit Chopra, former Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and former Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Commissioner, as Secretary of the state’s new Business and Consumer Services Agency (BCSA). The new cabinet‑level agency, which formally launches on July 1, 2026, is designed to consolidate and elevate state‑level consumer and market oversight at a moment when federal enforcement is being scaled back. Governor Newsom framed the move as bringing “one of the nation’s most prominent consumer protection leaders” into state government to crack down on corporate abuse, curb junk fees, and lower costs for Californians.

On May 6, several Senate Democrats sent letters to three nationwide consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) requesting detailed information about how Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) loans are being handled in consumer reporting. The letters, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D‑MA), follow a prior set of information requests made in November 2025 to BNPL providers about whether and how they furnish BNPL data to CRAs.

In this joint episode of Payments Pros and The Consumer Finance Podcast, guest host Taylor Gess is joined by Stefanie Jackman to discuss amended debt collection regulations and restrictions for creditors, including tight communication limits and enhanced validation requirements. The conversation dives into the rise of coerced debt statutes, shortcomings of traditional identity theft frameworks, and how creditors should adjust training, intake, and escalation protocols to avoid reputational and legal risk. The discussion also explores state medical debt reporting bans, the preemption challenges, and cautious furnishing in the FCRA landscape.

On May 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its long‑awaited decision on remand in Cantero, again holding that New York’s 2% interest‑on‑escrow statute (General Obligations Law § 5‑601) is preempted as applied to national banks. This follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous 2024 opinion (discussed here), which vacated the Second Circuit’s earlier decision and instructed the court to apply the Barnett Bank “prevents or significantly interferes” standard through a “nuanced comparative analysis” of prior preemption precedents.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Troutman Pepper Locke Partners Stefanie Jackman and Brent Hoard to take a close look at the world of medical debt collection. The discussion covers how HIPAA applies to medical debt, what it really means to be a “business associate,” and common privacy challenges that can turn routine collection efforts into regulatory headaches. They also focus on key federal and state debt collection regimes, including the FDCPA, the No Surprises Act, and increasingly complex credit reporting requirements. The group provides insight on collection strategies for health care providers and third-party collectors that are both compliant and workable in practice. For anyone handling medical-related receivables, this episode serves as a practical guide to safeguarding patient information, maintaining tax-exempt status, and enhancing collections while staying within regulatory boundaries.

Recent reporting from the ABA Banking Journal and the American Banker describes a rapidly evolving restructuring of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) under the Trump administration, with significant implications for the agency’s future role and for regulated entities.

On April 22, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued its final rewrite of Subpart A of Regulation B (Reg B) under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), which eliminates disparate impact from enforcement of ECOA, clarifies the prohibition on discouraging prospective applicants, and establishes new restrictions on special purpose credit programs (SPCPs). The Bureau has largely finalized the rule as proposed, with only clarifying edits rather than substantive revisions. Notably, the Bureau did so after receiving approximately 64,500 comments on the proposal from industry, consumer advocates, state attorneys general, and members of Congress. The rule will become effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register.

On March 13, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released its draft Strategic Plan for FY 2026–2030 and accepted public comment through April 17. The plan, required under the Government Performance and Results Act, sets the Bureau’s mission and priorities for the next four years and explicitly aligns the CFPB’s regulatory strategy with President Trump’s pro‑growth, deregulatory agenda.