The National Treasury Employees Union and several allied organizations asked a federal judge yesterday to clarify that the Trump administration cannot allow the CFPB to run out of money by refusing to request its statutory funding from the Federal Reserve.
In their filing, the plaintiffs argue that officials are attempting to evade a March 2025 injunction by adopting a “novel interpretation” of the Bureau’s funding statute that no prior administration, court, or the Federal Reserve itself has ever endorsed. They emphasize that the Federal Reserve has “billions of dollars in combined earnings” available and that Congress intended the CFPB’s funding stream to remain stable and insulated from political pressure.
The union warns that the administration’s position could effectively shutter the Bureau despite the court order blocking efforts to dismantle it. Their motion seeks a clear ruling that the defendants may not “justify a violation” of the injunction by willfully declining to draw the funds Congress authorized.
The Humility Pledge
Against the backdrop of litigation and uncertainty around its future, the CFPB also released its new “Humility in Supervisions Pledge,” which examiners will read to institutions at the start of each exam.
The pledge signals a significant shift from the CFPB’s approach under prior leadership, committing the Bureau to:
- Focus supervisory resources on the most pressing consumer risks, especially those affecting service members, veterans, and their families.
- Avoid duplicating work conducted by state regulators.
- Reduce exam lengths from the traditional eight weeks to timelines aligned with each exam’s scope.
- Increase transparency, narrow data requests, and encourage prompt, under-budget completion of reviews.
The CFPB also emphasizes collaboration and a preference for resolving issues within supervision rather than through enforcement, marking a clear repositioning of its regulatory posture for 2026.
Bureau Settles with MoneyLion
The CFPB has also finalized a stipulated judgment resolving its long-running lawsuit against MoneyLion, which alleged violations of the Military Lending Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act.
Under the order:
- MoneyLion will fund $1.75 million in redress for affected borrowers, with more than $1.72 million allocated to service members harmed by loans exceeding the MLA’s 36% APR cap.
- The company is prohibited from preventing borrowers from canceling memberships based on unpaid loan balances or fees, from collecting certain past membership fees, and from furnishing negative credit information tied to unpaid fees.
- MoneyLion must overhaul its practices around membership cancellation, loan repayment, fee disclosures, and credit reserve account access.
- The Bureau’s findings will have collateral-estoppel effect in future proceedings relating to these issues.
Read the proposed stipulation in the MoneyLion case. Read the motion for clarification filed by the employee’s union. Read the supervisory pledge
