Whether enforcement actions initiated by an unconstitutionally-appointed agency head should be dismissed and whether passive securitization vehicles qualify as 'covered persons' under the Consumer Financial Protection Act

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, 591 U.S. 197 (2020), this Court held that the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was unconstitutionally insulated from presidential removal, in violation of the separation of powers, and the Court severed the unlawful restrictions on the director’s removal from the rest of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). The CFPB initiated this enforcement action under the direction of Richard Cordray before that decision. Petitioners are 15 passive securitization trusts, with no employees, officers, or directors, that are used to acquire, pool, and securitize private student loans. The CFPB has sued petitioners for the alleged conduct of third parties who service the securitized loans. The questions presented are as follows: 1. When should an enforcement action that is initiated by an agency head _ unconstitutionally insulated from removal be dismissed to remedy that violation? 2. Whether passive securitization vehicles used to acquire and pool consumer loans are “covered persons” because they “engage[] in offering or providing a consumer financial product or service” under the CFPA.