cover art for Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America

Cato Daily Podcast

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America

The CFPB has long been controversial. Its unique structure makes it powerful in ways other agencies are not. Jennifer Schulp and Tommy Berry detail the recent Supreme Court holding that the agency's funding doesn't violate the Appropriations Clause.

More episodes

View all episodes

  • J.D. Vance on Immigration

    Donald Trump's running mate this time around is a consistent opponent of immigration and doesn't draw the typical – and reasonable - distinctions between legal and illegal immigrants. David Bier comments.
  • Free Trade in the Name of National Security

    Protectionism is frequently justified on national security grounds, but there are strong reasons to liberalize trade in the name of American security, as well. Colin Grabow explains.
  • The Ever-Expanding Definition of 'Public Health'

    The One Weird Trick of public health advocacy seems to be to define as much as possible as a public health concern to justify massive intervention into the lives of Americans. Jeff Singer explains.
  • Two Problems That Vanish with the End of Cannabis Prohibition

    Most Americans have access to either medical or recreational cannabis, but prohibition at the federal level persists, and that prohibition keeps in place at least two big problems. Paul Best explains.
  • Regulating AI and Free Expression

    David Inserra says looming regulation of artificial intelligence has huge implications for the future of free expression.
  • Social Security Still Poses Massive Fiscal Risks

    The fiscal picture for the federal government is increasingly dire. Social Security’s worsening finances figure prominently in that story. Cato's Romina Boccia and Brian Riedl of the Manhattan Institute tell the tale.
  • What about the Feds’ Junk Fees?

    The federal government has its own problematic junk fees, according to Cato's Nick Anthony.
  • More Thoughts on Trump v. United States

    It's hard to get a handle on the breadth of protections handed to current and future presidents in Trump v. United States. Cato's Walter Olson says much of the immunity from prosecution handed to these heads of state is wholly invented by SCOTUS.
  • The NetChoice Cases Deliver Win for Freedom of Speech

    State laws seeking to compel social media companies to allow certain content or people on their platforms failed to pass muster at the Supreme Court. Jennifer Huddleston evaluates what's next.