Judge temporarily blocks Trump administration from dismantling Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in one of the most significant rulings yet against its efforts to dramatically shrink the federal government.

A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in one of the most significant rulings yet against its efforts to dramatically shrink the federal government. The new preliminary injunction “maintains the agency’s existence until this case has been resolved on the merits,” Judge Amy Berman Jackson wrote in her 112-page ruling Friday, by “reinstating and preserving the agency’s contracts, work force, data, and operational capacity, and protecting and facilitating the employees’ ability to perform statutorily required activities.” Jackson’s ruling also tees up for an appeal a case that will allow President Donald Trump to test with higher courts his sweeping theory of executive power, against mandates issued by Congress. She said that in the early weeks of the administration, Trump officials were “were fully engaged in a hurried effort to dismantle and disable the agency entirely,” with actions taken in “complete disregard” of Congress’ decision to create the financial watchdog agency in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis. The litigation brought to challenge this disassembly, “slowed, but did not deter” the administration, Jackson wrote, describing that the moves by the agency’s politically appointed leaders to walk back some of the early shut-down directives “were nothing more than window dressing.” She said that the evidence in the case suggested, rather than stemming a recognition that there were statutory mandates requiring that parts of the agency continue to operate, the recent moves to resume some work were “more likely a charade for the Court’s benefit.” Regardless, she concluded that her emergency intervention was necessary because “the Court’s oversight is the only thing holding the defendants back.”