Michael Greve on the Constitutional Challenge to Dodd-Frank

My colleague Michael Greve has a two part analysis of the constitutional challenge that has been filed to Dodd-Frank (Part I and Part II).

Let me commend it first by noting that regardless of whether one agrees with Michael’s analysis and final conclusion his posts are a useful and succinct summary of the issues in play in the litigation challenging Dodd-Frank.  Over the past several months I’ve had a number of queries asking for (1) a good summary of the issues in the litigation and (2) whether the challenge is credible.  Michael’s posts are the best I’ve seen on both points (which isn’t to say that there might be others that I haven’t seen).  As Micheal notes there are other issues raised in the litigation that he doesn’t address in that post.

This challenge to Dodd-Frank was filed on the eve of the Obamacare decision so it hasn’t received a lot of public attention yet, but the case is starting to ramp-up now.

Update: Greve has posted a correction to a point he made in the original post regarding the removal of the CFPB Director in response to a comment made here (and there).  His mea culpa is here.