Featured Posts

Subscribe to Featured Posts via RSS

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.

On July 8, a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a significant decision in the case of Custom Communications, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The panel vacated the FTC’s amended Negative Option Rule aka the “click-to cancel” rule, citing procedural deficiencies in the rulemaking process. Specifically, the panel found that the FTC failed to conduct a required preliminary regulatory analysis, which deprived stakeholders of the opportunity to comment on alternatives and engage with the FTC’s cost-benefit analysis.

On June 26, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) released new guidance regarding the treatment of virtual currency in the calculation of a licensee’s tangible net worth under the Money Transmission Modernization Act (MTMA). In the press release announcing the new guidance, Brandon Milhorn, CSBS President and CEO, expressed enthusiasm for the new guidance: “We are very pleased to issue the first CSBS advisory guidance to support the consistent, effective, and transparent implementation of the MTMA. The advisory guidance process will help the MTMA evolve and grow as money transmitters deploy new technologies and develop new products and services to support their customers.”

On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. —- — S.Ct. —- 2025 WL 1716136 (2025), addressing whether, under the Administrative Orders Review Act (Hobbs Act), 28 U.S.C. §2342, district courts are bound by the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, and District of Columbia Circuits had held that because the Hobbs Act vests exclusive jurisdiction to determine the validity of FCC orders in the circuit (appellate) courts, district courts were bound by the FCC’s orders interpreting the TCPA.

Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) published in the Federal Register an interim final rule extending compliance dates for its 2023 small business lending rule under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B) (Final Rule) This extension comes in response to court orders in ongoing litigation, affecting the timeline for financial institutions to comply with data collection requirements for women-owned, minority-owned, and small businesses.