This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Wednesday, October 12, 2016.

I'm Caleb Brown. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's structure is unconstitutional,

according to a federal appeals court.

That ruling may end up altering the relatively unaccountable powers the agency

claims to possess. Mark Calabria is director of Financial Regulation Studies at the Cato Institute.

We spoke today.

So let's, you know, as everybody remembers, the CFB was created by Dodd-Frank, and what it did was consolidated financial

protection and the other regulators including the Department of Housing and

and Over Development HUD which enforced the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and so P.H. M. the real estate settlement procedures act.

And so, pHM mortgage lender was charged under RESPA

and challenged the final penalty.

And one of the grounds for challenging was that the

CFPB itself was unconstitutional in the structure. What you had the court rule

on which went back to these precedents that were set in the new deal.

So pre-New Deal, we didn't really have independent agencies.

It was arguably pretty clear.

You were part of the executive branch, you were part of the legislative branch, part of

Justice York. So in the new deal, you were part of the legislative branch, part of the district.

So in the new deal, you had all these independent agencies develop, and you had throughout

the 30s and 40s, the Supreme Court established a number of sort of rules where, okay, this is acceptable.

This is not beyond the pale.

And so the court ruled that the CFPB was just so isolated

...