
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
This morning in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Ass’n, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the CFPB’s funding mechanism and saved the regulator. The decision was 7-2 with Justice Clarence Thomas — joined by every liberal on the Bench — writing the majority.
Thomas’s opinion lays out a straightforward case for the CFPB’s funding, which by statute, receives its money from the Federal Reserve. “Under the Appropriations Clause, an appropriation is simply a law that authorizes expenditures from a specified source of public money for designated purposes,” Thomas said. He continued, “The statute that provides the Bureau’s funding meets these requirements. We therefore conclude that the Bureau’s funding mechanism does not violate the Appropriations Clause.”

Private Practice Lawyers: Rater Your Work With In-House Counsel
Please share your thoughts in this brief and anonymous survey.
Seems simple, right? Well, not according to the dissent, penned by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Neil Gorsuch. In a dissent running 25 pages, Alito trots out a supposedly originalist analysis of the CFPB’s funding to find it unconstitutional. But the truth is, he wanted to find the funding mechanism unconstitutional for his own reasons — which I’m sure are entirely UNRELATED to the generous gifts he receives from billionaire/noted CFPB critic Paul Singer — and jury-rigged his rationale on the backend.
And he’s getting dragged for his nakedly partisan efforts.
An originalist's guide to the Alito dissent in CFPB: pic.twitter.com/wYnO2waAqS
— Joe Dudek (@JoeDudekJD) May 16, 2024

How MyCase’s Smart Spend Can Help Increase Your Profits
This tweak to your financial management seems like a no-brainer.
2/ Alito's dissent cites my work 8 times, which is lovely and all, but the dissent is wrong, and a remotely attentive reading of that work would make it clear why. https://t.co/lp0KcLOl4t
— Josh Chafetz (@joshchafetz) May 16, 2024
It’s so bad, even Clarence Thomas got in on the pile on.
Thomas' rejoinder to the Alito/Gorsuch dissent is honestly pretty funny, at least by SCOTUS standards. "You're just making shit up," but moderately more polite. https://t.co/Og4D0x9VjI pic.twitter.com/0E3igyo6J3
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 16, 2024
“How lawless does your opinion have to be to be brutally owned by Clarence Thomas, from the left” is a question we can now answer thanks to 5CA and Alito and Gorsuch https://t.co/xlhsCaIsu7
— Scott Lemieux (@LemieuxLGM) May 16, 2024
Alito’s dissent is a deeply unserious affair and the nation’s economy is lucky it’s only a dissent.
"Oh good" — me, reading the words "Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion"
— Barred and Boujee aka Madiba Dennie (@AudreLawdAMercy) May 16, 2024
More from Alito's dissent: This just isn't true! Congress can repeal of modify all of these regulations! It can step in and "control or monitor" the CFPB's use of funds at any moment! It can nullify or expand every iota of power that the agency exercises! https://t.co/Og4D0x9VjI pic.twitter.com/AZo2smvh7C
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 16, 2024
Alito after searching through history to find sources that agree with him:
"In conclusion, Appropriations is a land of contrasts." https://t.co/bOAeIv8zD8
— Owen Barcala (@obarcala) May 16, 2024
But the jokes about it *are* pretty funny.
Alito: "The Framers would be shocked, even horrified, by this scheme."
Motherfucker, the framers "would be shocked, even horrified" by an ATM. Maybe they're not the only people to consult on the issue of *banking.*
— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) May 16, 2024
Today’s other big loser — the Fifth Circuit (talk about unserious). It was their decision holding the CFPB’s funding unconstitutional that was overturned today. The Circuit continues their mission to move the Overton window of jurisprudence to the right so that the Supreme Court doesn’t look quite as radical by comparison.
CA5's ruling below was too insane even for Thomas to buy, leaving Alito the partisan hack and Gorsuch the nihilist ideologue as the dissenting duo.
But all 6 Republican justices will reunite to overturn Chevron and make themselves our system's permanent de jure deregulators.
— Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) May 16, 2024
Supreme Court less insane than the Fifth Circuit https://t.co/WVnRuoN2xD
— Tim Wu (@superwuster) May 16, 2024
We're going to come back to this a lot over the next six weeks, but *please* don't confuse "#SCOTUS slaps down a wackadoodle Fifth Circuit decision" with "#SCOTUS is more moderate than its critics claim."
"Not as radical as the Fifth Circuit" is not the same as "moderate." https://t.co/BoBZKb1wJu
— Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) May 16, 2024
Today's Supreme Court decision is certainly an embarrassment for Judges Wilson, Willett, and Engelhardt, who sat on the panel that struck down the CFPB. But! It's also a humiliation for Judges Jones, Elrod, Duncan, and Oldham, who previously embraced the same inane theory. pic.twitter.com/BUKMHxoxFa
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 16, 2024
While sane folks may celebrate that the CFPB — and our economy — lives to fight another day, it’s a good reminder that too many powerful jurists want to watch it all burn.
Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Mastodon @[email protected].