Federal judge orders halt to Trump administration efforts to dismantle consumer agency

Show Caption

WASHINGTON − A federal judge ordered the Trump administration Friday to stop dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, setting up another showdown in the courts over whether the executive or legislative branches determines spending priorities.

President Donald Trump’s advisory group called the Department of Government Efficiency recommended basically shuttering the consumer watchdog. But the National Treasury Employees Union fought what it called sweeping efforts to lay off agency workers and effectively abolish the agency that aims to protect consumers from banks.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington, D.C., ordered the administration to reinstate and preserve agency contracts, retain data and protect agency employees’ ability to perform legally required work. She also directed the CFPB to provide office space for agency employees or permission to work remotely, and to maintain a hotline for consumer complaints.

More: Secrecy sits at center of Trump’s clash with courts

“The motion for preliminary injunction to be decided boils down to one question: should the Court take action to preserve the the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau now, before the case concerning its fate has been resolved?” Jackson wrote. “The Court has made those findings, and the answer is an overwhelming yes: the Court can and must act.”

CBPB Union President Cat Farman called the ruling a win for working people.

“The Trump administration’s illegal efforts to dismantle the CFPB benefit corporate bad actors and wealthy special interests at the expense of everyday Americans,” Farman said in a statement. “I’m thrilled to see the judge throw Russell Vought’s Project 2025 playbook in the garbage where it belongs. CFPB workers are eager to get back to work serving the American people and protecting their hard-earned paychecks from Wall Street greed.”

More: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ordered to stop work: What to know about the agency

The CFPB was one of the agencies Trump targeted earliest after taking office Jan. 20. Others included the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Education Department. But unions, federal workers and advocacy groups have fought the moves in court and the cases have become a showdown between Trump and judges who are blocking him while the cases are litigated.

Congress traditionally sets spending priorities under the Constitution, but Trump and his aides have argued the funding levels are ceilings and they can spend less. Another facet of the court battle is that Congress specifically authorized the CFPB’s work in statute, so advocates contend Trump can’t erase it with the stroke of a pen in an executive order.

The Supreme Court could eventually be asked to map new guidelines for which branch – the legislative or executive – sets funding priorities.

Jackson rules Trump disregarded Congress creating the agency

More: Lawmakers warn Trump he can’t ‘pick and choose’ what to spend from funding bill

Jackson ruled that CFPB would be irreparably harmed if she didn’t block the dismantling while the case is litigated.

Evidence from the chief operating officer and the agency’s own documents showed that Vought, the acting director of the CFPB, ordered all employees to stop work on Feb. 10, Jackson wrote. Government officials were dismantling the agency entirely, firing probationary workers without cause, terminating contracts and closing offices, she wrote.

In her opinion, Jackson wrote that Trump’s actions were “in complete disregard” of Congress creating the agency in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

“The defendants are still engaged in an effort to implement a Presidential plan to shut the agency down entirely and to do it fast,” Jackson wrote. “Absent an injunction freezing the status quo – preserving the agency’s data, its operational capacity, and its workforce – there is a substantial risk that the defendants will complete the destruction of the agency completely in violation of law well before the Court can rule on the merits, and it will be impossible to rebuild.”