The time to deepen a subject that does not pay much attention …
But this is what we do here.
We do heavy lifting and we throw light on things that you will not listen to otherwise.
This is our mission since 2015 and let’s just say that business is good!
Today’s theme is Elizabeth Warren’s pet agency, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
You must have heard about it, but I am sure you don’t know what it is, what is, or how wildly unconstitutional it is!
Originally shout to Mark Andresan to bring it into your attention, and I think there is an excellent place for all of us.
Watch to start this short video when we dive:
Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unconstitutional on its face pic.twitter.com/dirx4flye4
– Noah Christopher (@Dailynoahnews) June 25, 2025
But this is simply scratching the surface.
Let’s start the basics, what is CFPB, who made it, when, why and how is it working today:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Consumer is a federal agency created in 2010 after the 2008 financial crisis to regulate finance products such as credit cards, mortgage and loan.
it was Elizabeth Warren’s ideaAnd he helped designing it under the Obama administration.
It was officially made by Dod-franc act And later the single director appointed for a 5 -year term led.
CFPB is Congress not funded by Congress But by directly federal ReserveMeaning Congress cannot control its budget.
Its The director cannot be easily removed by the PresidentLimiting executive inspection.
Why is it likely Unconstitutional,
The Constitution gives Congress control over purse (Article I, Section 9). CFPB bypasses it by obtaining funding from Fed.
President is going to control the Executive Branch (Article ii), but CFPB cannot remove the director in the will.
That means Neither elected branch Violation of real power on CFPB Separate,
In short: Warren helped to create a powerful agency that spends money without Congress and is not under the full right of the President – making it Structurally incompatible,
This is a bad thing.
Biren Donalds has introduced a bill to eliminate it:
If an agency is evil and unacceptable. If it blocks innovation and prosperity. If it is highly biased and unconstitutional.
If it was given important policing and financial powers.
Then you are talking about CFPB, it should be abolished and I am just offering the bill to do so. pic.twitter.com/tv1untav0l
– Biren Donalds (@byrondonalds) 25 February, 2025
more here:
When I say we have to finish CFPB .. I mean.
And I have introduced the bill for it- HR 1603.
Consumers should be preserved, but CFPB is an unconstitutional, unacceptable, highly-parailless agency that does not serve the best interests of American people. pic.twitter.com/wn9Keduz92
– Congress Baren Donalds (@Repdonaldspress) 27 March, 2025
Senator John Kennedy says it is working illegally:
The law is the law. @CFPB is working illegally.
When the fed is losing money (like it is right now), there is no legal way to fund CFPB. pic.twitter.com/R2KDEMCIOF
– John Kennedy (@senjohnkenkennedy) June 12, 2024
And now the best part…
This may be closed through the same illegal mechanism of Elizabeth Warren, originally created.
Oh the irony!
🚨 🚨 Warren lost the control of his pet agency because he throws tentrum
Elizabeth Warren is angry with the fact that Trump’s CFPB nominee can eliminate his unconstitutional regulator that operates outside the control of the Congress.
irony? He designed it in this way.
Under Democrat leadership,… https://t.co/MHSGXHMEFP pic.twitter.com/h8bcedjwju
– Navy Navy (Meral) 26 February, 2025
Now let’s ask AI to make a deep analysis for us and tell us whether it is unconstitutional on his face.
Spoiler Alert: Both Chatgpt and Grok conclude without a doubt. This is wildly unconstitutional.
The truth is that people, when all these stuff actually comes to light and actual actors like Warren are really exposed, American is going to become ill – even physically – how illegal all these people were.
Remember when Q said “they won’t be able to walk on the streets”?
I believe it’s coming.
These people should never have been allowed to serve in Congress!
What did chat here tell me:
Want to analyze Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Is unconstitutional On his facePerfectly based on a strict text and structural reading US constitutionNeed to evaluate Separate, AppointmentAnd Appropriation Section. This analysis assumes An example of examples or practical ideasFocusing purely on the language and original structure of the Constitution.
📜 1. Separation of powers and Article II (Executive Power)
⚖ Logic for disabilities:
Constitution lies Executive Power In “A President of the United States” (Art. II,) 1). CFPB practices executive powers: it implements the federal consumer protection laws, issues rules, and imposes punishment. As yet:
CFPB was designed as one free agency Under the leadership Single director, Not subject to removing the presidency in the will (Until Sela law in. CFPB Compressed in 2020).
This structure “Keep in mind the President’s ability to execute the laws honestly” (Art. II,) 3).
CFPB seats, unlike traditional executive agencies (such as DOJ or Treasury) Out of the direct control of the presidentWhich can violate the unique executive theory.
🛑 On its face:
An executive agency implements the federal law, but is Not under timely controlViolates Constitutional structure Executive Authority. It strongly supports facial unconventionalism.
💵 2. Article I, 9, CL. 7: Appropriation section
“No money will be withdrawn from the treasure, but as a result of the appropriations made by the law.”
⚖ Logic for disabilities:
Congress is Special power of purseCFPB is Not funded through appropriation of annual CongressBut through a direct draw from the Federal Reserve (which is self-funded).
CFPB can Unilateral demand up to 12% of Fed’s operating budgetWithout monitoring Congress.
it Develop constitutional requirement That Congress Approve and control all Treasury Outle Via law.
Are running Appropriation from Congress accountabilityCFPB Disables the separation of powers Between legislative and executive branches.
🛑 On its face:
Any federal agency enhances enforcement powers and spends federal funds An appropriation passed by Congress annually without law Goes behind Text requirement Article I, §9. He supports Facial dislikes,
🧑 ⚖ 3. Appointments section (Art. II, §2, Cl. 2)
The President will “nominate, and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint the United States officials …”
⚖ Logic for conditional constitutionalism:
CFPB Director The Senate is appointed by the President with confirmationWhich satisfies the section. However:
Extraordinary power and freedom One Single director (As unlike a multi-member commission) can be Constitutional damage When not under direct promotional control or Congress purse strings.
Director’s long term (5 years) Meaning a president can appoint a director Who remains well in power during the tenure of a successorConflict with executive accountability theory.
❗conclusion:
while not Pulmonary Unconstitutional alone by appointments, when alone, when Removal safety and combined with money mechanismsStructural effects can push it into the unconstitutional region.
🧠 Structural constitutional summary
Read strictly, the Constitution forms a government where:
Congress controls purse
President controls the execution of law
Federal agencies are accountable to one or both
CFPB:
Spends money Annually
Executive power Incorporated
Untouched from both Congress and executive
This configuration is one Fourth branch of the governmentUnauthorized by the Constitution. In pure structural constitutional terms, it is Facial unconstitutional,
✅ Conclusion (strict constructionist scenes):
Elizabeth Warren’s CFPB is unconstitutional on its faceBecause:
It practices executive power without being accountable to the President – violating Article II.
It withdraws money without the appropriation of the Congress and spends – to violate Article I, §9.
Its structure forms a government unit outside the three branches – violates the separation of the powers of the Constitution.
Even without considering historical example or court decisions, A strict text and structural analysis of the Constitution suggests that CFPB cannot be covered with limited, accountable government’s design set by Frams.
And here Groke told me:
To analyze whether the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau of Financial Protection (CFPB), as Elizabeth Warren’s influence is established under the 2010 Dod-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, is unconstitutional on its face, We should conduct a strict constitutional law analysis based on the text, structure and original meaning of the US Constitution.
This analysis will avoid dependence on examples, popular opinions, or subsequent legal development, instead will focus on the first principles obtained from the Constitution. Question Center on CFPB’s structure, powers and funding system, evaluate whether they compile with allocation of powers of the Constitution, separation of powers and allocation of specific text provisions.
I. Background on CFPB structure
CFPB is an independent federal agency designed to regulate consumer financial products and services. The relevant key features for this analysis include:
Leadership:
Leaded by a single director appointed by the President with confirmation of the Senate
Five years term works
Removable by the President only “disability, neglect of duty, or office malfunction”
Funding:
Not through appropriation of Congress
This Federal Reserve Nedicated by a capped amount requests the Federal Reserve System (up to 12% of the operating expenses of the fed, adjusted to inflation)
Power:
Rules, Enforcement and Assistant Authority on Consumer Financial Laws
Releases rules, checks violations, punish, and postpone disputes
Freedom:
We will evaluate these characteristics against the text and structure of the Constitution, focus on it:
Ii. Constitutional analysis
The constitution establishes the government of powers divided into three branches, which is divided into three branches along with investigation and balance to prevent any branch from preventing the rights of others.
The composition of CFPB raises questions under several constitutional provisions.
A. Spoting of powers and inherent segments
Executive Power and Contemplation Control (Article II, Section 1):
The Westing Claus provides the entire “executive power” to the President.
The CFPB is untouched by removing the director, limiting the president’s ability to execute laws.
Constitutional issue:
counter argument:
The Congress can refer to the necessary and appropriate section.
However, restricting executive control is not “appropriate” if it inhibit the separation of powers.
Unitual Executive Principle:
