And this week, the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)—an agency expressly designed to insulate it from such upheaval—was rocked. It terminated between 1,400 and 1,500 employees, eliminating almost 90% of its staff. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson very unexpectedly stopped the mass dismissals in their tracks. In response, she issued a ruling to stop the firings while considering whether the CFPB had broken her prior rulings.
The 5,000 mass firings, which were announced on Thursday afternoon, faced rapid backlash from teachers, administrators, and the general public. Judge Jackson’s order prohibits the agency from firing any other employees while the appeals court addresses the issue. The judge expressed concerns regarding the CFPB’s compliance with a preliminary injunction, stating, “I am deeply concerned given the scope and speed of the agency’s action…about whether the agency is now in compliance with the preliminary injunction.”
The story notwithstanding, the judge did order that CFPB employees retain access to the computer systems. This gave them time to go about their work while the legal wrangling played out. This decision came on the heels of a stiff directive from the appeals court. It required that any staff reductions at the CFPB adhere to a “specific determination” of staffing requirements.
Mark Paoletta, the CFPB’s chief legal officer, affirmed that the agency had adhered to court orders throughout this contentious period. Controversy came from accusations against the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a department created by Elon Musk. There have been allegations that DOGE members disobeyed judicial orders. They claimed to have intimidated employees into working excessive hours without respite, fostering a hostile corporate culture.
That situation drew significant national attention, in the context of larger conversations about the CFPB’s future. In fact, President Donald Trump and Elon Musk are both calling for its abolition. They claim that the agency wastes limited resources and participates in politicized enforcement. Despite these calls, administration officials signaled in court that the CFPB would still remain in some form.
The White House has not responded to multiple inquiries since the news broke on what all this means for DOGE. Nor has the CFPB chimed in on the controversies engulfing it. As this legal drama plays out, time will tell what its effects will be on the CFPB’s functioning or on its more than 1,700 employees.
Leave a Reply