United States: English v Trump: Round 2

Last Updated: December 27 2017
Article by Ori Lev

The federal district court in Washington heard oral argument this morning (December 22, 2017) in the case of English v. Trump, the challenge brought by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Deputy Director Leandra English to President Trump's appointment of Mick Mulvaney as Acting Director of the CFPB. The case largely turns on whether the Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) authorized Mulvaney's appointment, as the government claims, or whether the Dodd Frank Act instead directs that the Deputy Director of the agency – and only the Deputy Director – can serve as the Acting Director when the Director resigns. The oral argument lasted nearly two hours and was lively and engaging. Judge Timothy Kelly was extremely well-prepared and ran the argument along topical lines about which he had questions. Judge Kelly did not rule from the bench, but most of his questions were for English's counsel and based on the nature of the questions it seems quite likely that Judge Kelly will deny her request for a preliminary injunction.

Judge Kelly moved methodically through the questions on the merits as well as the standards for a preliminary injunction. He asked questions about: the nature of the relief requested (is this a mandatory injunction and if so does that change the applicable standard); the nature of the claims in plaintiff's complaint (does she really have a separate constitutional claim or does that claim collapse into her statutory claim); how to apply certain cannons of statutory interpretation when comparing the FVRA's use of the word "may" and the Dodd Frank Act's use of the word "shall"; how other provisions of Dodd Frank impact the analysis; whether the Dodd Frank Act provision the plaintiff relies on applies to a Director's resignation; possible constitutional concerns with plaintiff's argument; what constitutes irreparable injury; and what the balance of the equities supports. In the back-and-forth, plaintiff's counsel got most of the questions and did most of the talking. Plaintiff's counsel pressed the point that the President's appointment of OMB Director Mulvaney undermines the CFPB's independence and closed by arguing that the case posed a threat to the tradition of independent financial regulators more generally. The government's lawyer (Chad Readler, the Acting Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division) – clearly sensing that the Judge was on the government's side and facing fewer questions – tended to make more targeted arguments that raised two or three points in rebuttal to the plaintiff. A more comprehensive summary of the argument follows.

* * *

The first issue raised by Judge Kelly was whether the injunction being sought was a mandatory injunction (directing action) or a more traditional preliminary injunction freezing the status quo while the merits could be addressed. This led to a colloquy regarding what constitutes the status quo, with plaintiff arguing it refers to the moment at midnight November 24, when former CFPB Director Richard Cordray resigned, and the government arguing that at its earliest it refers to the time when plaintiff filed her Complaint in this case, at which point CFPB leadership had already recognized Mr. Mulvaney as the lawful Acting Director of the agency.

The hearing then turned to one of plaintiff's key arguments: that because the Dodd Frank Act provision stating that the Deputy Director "shall" serve as the Acting Director in the Director's absence or unavailability is more specific than the generally-applicable FVRA, principles of statutory construction support the notion that the Dodd Frank Act applies and the FVRA does not. This quickly devolved into a discussion of the key question in the case: whether the FVRA applies alongside the Dodd Frank Act or is supplanted by it.

Judge Kelly began the questioning by noting that caselaw indicates that the general/specific principle only applies in cases of irreconcilable conflict between statutes, which does not appear to be the case here. English's counsel pushed back on this notion, arguing that this is a standard cannon of statutory construction and that the essential question in the case boils down to what Congress intended when it passed the Dodd Frank Act. Defense counsel was typically brief in his arguments, likely sensing that he had little persuading to do. On this particular issue, the government noted that (a) the FVRA envisions other agency-specific statutes working side-by-side with it; (b) the FVRA did not exempt other single-Director independent agencies from its purview when it was enacted; (c) the Dodd Frank Act has a provision stating that, except as otherwise expressly provided, all other federal law governing officers applies to the CFPB; and (d) the Dodd Frank expressly provides that the Dodd Frank Act trumps other federal law with respect to certain other employee-related matters, indicating that Congress knew how to make clear if it wanted Dodd Frank to be exclusive (as plaintiff was arguing here).

In one of the few issues directed at the defendants, Judge Kelly then asked whether the government concedes that the Dodd Frank provision at issue – which speaks to the Director's absence or unavailability – also applies to the Director's resignation and, if so, whether the fact that the issue is a close one has any bearing on the rest of the case. The government avoided the first part of the question, noting only that the Office of Legal Counsel determined that the provision at issue covers resignation. But it then argued that even if the provision applies to render the Deputy Director the Acting Director by default upon the Director's resignation, it was not clear enough a provision to supplant the FVRA's parallel authority authorizing the President to appoint a Senate-confirmed individual to that role.

Plaintiff's counsel then raised the separate argument that even were President Trump authorized to name an Acting Director, he could not name a sitting White House official – like OMB Director Mulvaney – to the position because of the CFPB's independence. In response, the government noted that the CFPB was originally run by the Treasury Secretary and Elizabeth Warren, serving as an advisor to both the President and the Secretary. The government also noted that the Dodd Frank Act does contain limitations on who can serve as CFPB Director – for example, the Director cannot be an employee of a Federal Reserve bank or a Federal home loan bank – but does not prohibit the OMB Director or other White House officials from filling the role.

Judge Kelly then raised the doctrine of constitutional avoidance and asked whether that doesn't suggest that defendants have the better argument. First, Judge Kelly established that plaintiff's position is that the Deputy Director cannot be removed from her position as Acting Director other than "for cause" (a protection that the statute provides to the Director). In light of that, Judge Kelly noted that the implications of plaintiff's argument are that an individual who has not been appointed to her role by any President and has never been confirmed by the Senate for any role can serve indefinitely against the President's wishes as the head of an agency with substantial authority so long as the Senate refuses to confirm the President's nominee. That, Judge Kelly suggested, raises concerns with respect to the clause of the Constitution that provides that the President shall "Take Care" that the laws are faithfully executed. Judge Kelly pressed plaintiff's counsel for any other example where this could happen; plaintiff's counsel only identified the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

Judge Kelly then moved on to questions concerning irreparable harm. In a rare comment disagreeing with the defendants' arguments, Judge Kelly noted that he did not view this as a run-of-the-mill employment case. But he still questioned what the nature of plaintiff's allegedly irreparable harm was. After a lengthy discussion, plaintiff conceded that her irreparable harm argument was based at least in part on the different actions the CFPB would likely take under her leadership. At core, plaintiff's argument was that if the court agreed with her on the merits, then that merits determination would also support a finding of irreparable injury and that the balance of the equities would tip in her favor.

In closing arguments, plaintiff's counsel asked the court to issue an order expeditiously to enable a quick appeal, even if a more fulsome opinion would follow at a later date. He then emphasized plaintiff's independence arguments, asserting that the question for the court is how to be faithful to Congress' statutory design, which clearly envisioned an independent CFPB. He concluded by noting that the questions at issue relate not just to this case but that the government's position represents a threat to the norm of independence that governs the regulation of finance in this country.

The government in closing noted that plaintiff's independence argument is not grounded in the statutory text and that the FVRA represented a compromise among the branches of government and imposes strict time limits on how long an Acting Director can serve. The government also noted that arguments in its brief that plaintiff's claim should fail for the separate reasons that she did not follow quo warranto procedures and that issuing an injunction against the President is an extraordinary remedy.

As the above summary suggests, most of the discussion was between Judge Kelly and plaintiff's counsel. The government provided short succinct rebuttals to plaintiff's arguments in most cases and Judge Kelly had substantially more questions for plaintiff than for the defense. While taking cues from an oral argument is risky, it seemed fairly clear that Leandra English is unlikely to succeed at this stage of the litigation. Once Judge Kelly rules, his order will be appealable and will presumably be appealed by the losing party to the D.C. Circuit, where the fun will start again.

This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2017. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions