On August 21, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) took a significant step forward in its reconsideration of the Section 1033 open banking final rule, originally issued in November 2024, by issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR). This move follows the Bureau’s announcement that it would be reopening the rulemaking process when it requested a stay to the original rule amidst legal challenges.
In a significant ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a consumer’s state law claims against a federal credit union on federal preemption grounds. The putative class action plaintiff’s claims challenged the credit union’s $15 dollar returned-check fee under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), arguing it was an “unfair” and “unlawful” business practice, especially since the check the plaintiff deposited was declined without any funds being made available to him. The Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s ruling that the plaintiff’s state law unfair competition claim was preempted by 12 C.F.R. § 701.35, which states expressly that state laws regulating bank fees do not apply to federal credit unions.
Since the House passed the CLARITY Act on July 17, the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which has oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has been busy working on its own version of the U.S. crypto regulatory framework. Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC), along with Senators Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Bill Hagerty (R-TN), and Bernie Moreno (R-OH), released a discussion draft of the “Responsible Financial Innovation Act of 2025.” This comprehensive legislation aims to provide regulatory clarity, encourage innovation, and address key risks in the rapidly evolving digital asset ecosystem. This blog highlights critical elements of the draft bill, offering an overview of its major provisions and implications. Alongside the draft, the Senate Banking Committee has issued a broad Request for Information (RFI) to solicit feedback from the public, with responses due by August 5, 2025.
As a follow up to our May post, FAPA in the Spotlight Again: Second Circuit Renews Call for NY Court of Appeals Review, the New York Court of Appeals has finally agreed to consider New York’s Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act’s (FAPA) reach and constitutionality in the case of Art. 13 LLC. Interestingly, on the same day the Court of Appeals accepted the Second Circuit’s request, New York’s highest court also agreed to review a separate decision from the First Department, which found that it is constitutional to apply the FAPA amendments retroactively in the case of Van Dyke. Both appeals stem from actions seeking to cancel and discharge mortgages, where the New York trial courts previously held that the statute of limitations for foreclosure had expired.
On July 14, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued Bulletin 2025-16, announcing the removal of references to disparate impact liability from the “Fair Lending” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook and instructing examiners to cease examining banks for disparate impact liability. This change aligns with Executive Order (EO) 14281, issued by President Trump (discussed here), which aims to eliminate the use of disparate impact liability in all contexts at both the federal and state level.
The legal and constitutional implications of New York’s Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) are back in the spotlight as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit again turns to the New York Court of Appeals for guidance. In Article 13 LLC v. Ponce De Leon Federal Bank, 132 F.4th 586 (2d Cir. 2025), the Second Circuit certified two key questions regarding the scope and retroactive application of FAPA — a statute that has significantly altered the foreclosure litigation landscape in New York.
On May 9, the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs announced that President Trump signed into law Chairman Tim Scott’s (R-SC) Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution, effectively overturning the Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rule on overdraft fees. Chairman Scott, who spearheaded the effort, emphasized that the rule would have imposed detrimental price controls on overdraft services, potentially leading to more unbanked individuals and fewer consumer options.
Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced President Trump’s intent to nominate Jonathan McKernan as the Undersecretary of Domestic Finance. The press release states that McKernan’s continued service at Treasury “will ensure that his experience and expertise are best put to advancing the President’s America First agenda.”
This article was republished on insideARM on April 22, 2025.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released a memo to staff outlining its new supervision and enforcement priorities for 2025.
On April 9, the House of Representatives passed two Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolutions aimed at nullifying certain Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rules finalized in the final days of the Biden-Harris Administration. These resolutions, S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28, target rules related to limiting the overdraft fees that may be charged by large financial institutions, and extending supervisory authority over certain providers of digital payments services, respectively. The CRA resolutions are now before President Trump for signature.