The Blog

Dodd-Frank Is Unconstitutional

9:54 AM, Jun 22, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPER
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

C. Boyden Gray and Jim R. Purcell, writing in the Wall Street Journal:

When President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law nearly two years ago, he stated that "our financial system only works—our market is only free—when there are clear rules and basic safeguards that prevent abuse, that check excess, that ensure that it is more profitable to play by the rules than to game the system."

We completely agree. Which is why we filed a lawsuit on Thursday asking a federal court to declare that two parts of Dodd-Frank violate a bedrock rule of law: the Constitution's separation of powers, which the Founders designed specifically to limit the growth of government. ...

One of us is chairman and CEO of a small community bank in Texas that has been investing in its community for over a century. The other is a former White House counsel who has witnessed firsthand how commitment to the rule of law promotes economic growth.

Of course, the government will respond that we are "against consumers" or that we oppose "financial stability." And of course that's false. Along with the other plaintiffs in our case, the 60 Plus Association and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, we are taking a stand because we know that the surest protection for consumers and financial stability is the rule of law, beginning with the Constitution.

In fact, the White House responded exactly how Gray and Purcell predicted. From Reuters, "President Barack Obama 'will continue to fight any effort from our opponents to weaken the CFPB or water down its ability to protect middle-class families,' White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage said."

Whole thing here.

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 18 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers