Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images

The Supreme Court said the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is unconstitutional, but that the agency can keep operating under new rules.

Why it matters: The court’s ruling will make it easier for future presidents to fire the leader of the powerful watchdog agency, making it more subject to political vicissitudes.

Details: The CFPB was conceived by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), before her days in elected office, and created by Congress in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse.

  • Congress created a somewhat unusual leadership structure for the bureau: a single director, rather than a board, who serves a fixed five-year term and can only be fired by the president for "inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office."
  • Critics said that gave the director too much power, arguing that he or she should be fireable for any reason, like Cabinet officials and other senior political appointees.

The Supreme Court agreed, ruling that presidents must be able to fire CFPB directors at will.

Between the lines: The unusual leadership structure was designed to prevent the gridlock that a board of directors could produce, while also providing some continuity from one administration to the next.

  • Today’s ruling will undermine those goals, but in the grand scheme of things, it’s not that terrible a blow to the agency.
  • The court had the opportunity to strike down the entire CFPB, but it did not go that far. The CFPB will now function more similarly to other parts of the executive branch.

Read the ruling.

Editor's note: This story was corrected to remove an erroneous reference to the CFPB's current leadership. CFPB director Kathy Kraninger was confirmed by the Senate in 2018.

Go deeper

House Democrats propose 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices

The flag-draped casket of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg lies in repose at the Supreme Court. Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

House Democrats are set to introduce a bill next week that would impose 18-year term limits on future Supreme Court justices, allowing a president to nominate two justices during each term in office.

The big picture: The bill, sponsored by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Don Beyer (D-Va.) and Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.), seeks to depoliticize the process of placing new justices on the court — a fight that has taken on new light after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last week.

Updated 9 mins ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

  1. Global: Total confirmed cases as of 9 a.m. ET: 33,138,963 — Total deaths: 998,380 — Total recoveries: 22,953,639Map.
  2. U.S.: Total confirmed cases as of 9 a.m. ET: 7,116,455 — Total deaths: 204,762 — Total recoveries: 2,766,280 — Total tests: 101,298,794Map.
  3. States: 3 states set single-day coronavirus case records last week
  4. Health: The childless vaccine — Why kids get less severe coronavirus infections.
  5. World: India the second country after U.S. to hit 6 million cases
18 mins ago - Technology

Exclusive: Where Trump and Biden stand on tech issues

Photo illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Getty Images photos: Win McNamee and Saul Loeb/AFP

Joe Biden has laid out a more concrete tech agenda whereas President Trump has focused on tax cuts and deregulation while criticizing tech firms for anti-conservative bias. That's according to a side-by-side analysis of the two candidates' tech records by the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation shared exclusively with Axios.

Why it matters: The tech industry needs to prepare for either four more years of Trump's impulsive policy approach or for a Biden administration that's likely to be critical of tech but slow to take action.