A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to "Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices".
Summary
SJR147 is a congressional disapproval resolution under the Congressional Review Act. It targets a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule that withdrew a prior CFPB statement of policy on the prohibition of abusive acts or practices. If enacted, the resolution would nullify the withdrawal rule and restore the earlier policy statement as if the withdrawal had no legal effect.
The measure does not create a new consumer protection standard on its own; instead, it uses Congress’s CRA authority to block a regulatory change made by the CFPB. The practical effect would be to preserve the agency’s earlier guidance on how it interprets and applies its authority over abusive acts or practices in consumer financial markets, affecting the CFPB and regulated financial institutions subject to its oversight.
Impact
The resolution would affect federal administrative law by disapproving a CFPB rule under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, and making the withdrawal of the 2023 policy statement legally ineffective. That would leave the earlier Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition on Abusive Acts or Practices in place, shaping CFPB enforcement and supervision expectations for banks, lenders, and other consumer financial service providers. It would not directly amend state law, but it could influence compliance practices and consumer protection enforcement nationwide.
Sentiment
The available legislative history suggests the bill is politically contested rather than broadly consensual. It was introduced by Senator Durbin, referred to committee, discharged by petition, and later saw a motion to proceed rejected in the Senate by voice vote, indicating that it did not advance smoothly and likely faced significant opposition or insufficient support. The overall tone around the measure appears to reflect a divide over CFPB authority and the proper scope of federal consumer protection enforcement.
Contention
The main point of contention is whether the CFPB should retain the ability to withdraw its own policy statement on abusive acts or practices. Supporters of the resolution likely view the withdrawal as weakening consumer protections and limiting the agency’s enforcement posture, while opponents likely see the resolution as an improper congressional override of agency discretion and a constraint on regulatory flexibility. The dispute centers on the balance between stronger consumer protection standards and limiting federal regulatory reach.