Kathy Kraninger

The high court will decide how much latitude a president has to fire the director of an independent agency.

In her second day of congressional testimony, Kathy Kraninger took heat from Senate Democrats for weighing in on constitutional questions about her agency and for her enforcement track record.

CFPB Director Kathy Kraninger faced a barrage of questions from Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee over why the agency has not demanded refunds for consumers in recent settlements.

A list of upcoming cases published by the high court did not include a challenge to the bureau's constitutionality, but the justices could still decide to review it at a later date.

The two Democrats waded into a court battle over the president's ability to fire a director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The industry had welcomed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau plan allowing debt collectors to use electronic communication, but some worry about the effect of a court decision concerning email correspondence.

By declaring that she has too much statutory power, the agency’s director has potentially opened a floodgate of litigation.

If the court agrees to hear the case, its conservative majority could make it easier for a president to fire a CFPB director, though other outcomes are possible.

There were signs Kathy Kraninger would continue a rollback of consent orders and investigations, but many observers see an aggressive approach reminiscent of the Obama era.

The agency's director told congressional leaders and staff that she backs a Supreme Court challenge to the bureau's leadership structure.

Senate Democrats are warning the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to be careful as it considers changes to its mortgage underwriting rules.

The Supreme Court may be closer to examining a key restraint on a president's ability to change CFPB leadership.

The bureau issued three policies removing the threat of legal liability for approved companies that test new products.

The event is the bureau's second in a series on consumer protection policy. The first dealt with the agency's authority to penalize firms for unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices.

Though advocates and industry are rarely aligned, they are starting to coalesce around a plan that would call for the elimination of the CFPB’s 43% debt-to-income limit as part of its qualified mortgage rule.

With the agency mulling changes to the “Qualified Mortgage” regulation, mortgage lenders say little-known standards for how they document a borrower’s income would be a good place to start.

Many in the industry say releasing GSE-backed loans from stringent underwriting rules has helped the housing market recover, but a new level of regulatory burden could reverse those gains.

The mortgage industry was caught off guard by regulators’ decision to cease special treatment for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in complying with underwriting rules. But how big of an impact will the new policy have?

The agency’s director said it will let a temporary GSE exemption from the “qualified mortgage” regulation expire.

The CFPB did not file any fair-lending enforcement actions in the 2018 fiscal year and did not refer any Equal Credit Opportunity Act violations to the Department of Justice.