@jsovern.bsky.social
Michael Millemann Professor of Consumer Protection Law, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law. Posts etc. are made solely in my individual capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone else or any institution.
NYC should change the name of Fifth Avenue for the block that Trump Tower is on to "Release the Epstein Files Avenue."
02.08.2025 23:54 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
I've had a few recent conversations with judges and law profs who haven't tried generative AI, or have only used it for a few minutes to write a poem or other trivial fun. After a few people asked me about how to start, I thought I'd write up my suggestions: www.wilftownsend.net/p/some-ideas...
10.06.2025 13:36 — 👍 9 🔁 4 💬 1 📌 5
My latest letter in the Times: "How can I know I’m right if I don’t hear the arguments for why I’m wrong?|https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/16/opinion/novels-men-reading.html (you have to scroll down to see my letter)
16.07.2025 21:20 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
The first batch of Byrd bath guidance from the parliamentarian has been released!
HUGE victory for Dems and for consumers everywhere: Republicans cannot defund CFPB.
Notably, the Motion, as observed by Amici, is unprecedented. The Parties in this case—a government agency and private parties—voluntarily entered into a settlement and consent decree to resolve the dispute. As previously noted, the consent decree, among other things, enjoined Townstone from engaging in any acts that violate the ECOA in connection with offering or providing mortgage loans. The voluntary nature of the resolution of this case cannot be overemphasized. It was only after a change at the leadership at CFPB that CFPB now seeks—along with Defendants—to unwind the very settlement and consent decree that it negotiated.
Recall that the investigation and initiation of the lawsuit occurred during President Trump’s first term, not under some previous administration. Presumably, CFPB launched the lawsuit after it determined that there was a legal and factual basis for the suit. Apparently, that was not the case. Now, current CFPB leadership under the second Trump administration, in an act of legal hara-kiri that would make a samurai blush, falls on the proverbial sword and attests that the lawsuit lacked a legal or factual basis.7 That’s not all, as current CFPB leadership lambasts CFPB leadership under the first administration for trampling Defendants’ First Amendment rights.
![Moreover, the Court agrees with Amici that granting the Motion would erode
public confidence in the finality of judgments. It would set a precedent suggesting
that a new administration could seek to vacate or otherwise nullify the voluntary
resolution of a case between a prior administration (or the same administration ,but
under different agency leadership) and a private party merely because its leadership
thought the original litigation unwise or improperly motivated. That is a Pandora’s
box the Court refuses to open.
All in all, balancing the benefits vacatur against the public interest in the
finality of judgment, the Court finds that the latter outweighs the former.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies the Parties’ Joint Rule 60(b)(6)
Motion for Relief and Vacatur of the Stipulated Final Judgment and Order [145]. The](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:nztbvvo2gl4227zuxjf7gog3/bafkreiajiidpjcym4guhvrvugtdsdogsftm37obeimxcdnylwm6przyfjy@jpeg)
Moreover, the Court agrees with Amici that granting the Motion would erode public confidence in the finality of judgments. It would set a precedent suggesting that a new administration could seek to vacate or otherwise nullify the voluntary resolution of a case between a prior administration (or the same administration ,but under different agency leadership) and a private party merely because its leadership thought the original litigation unwise or improperly motivated. That is a Pandora’s box the Court refuses to open. All in all, balancing the benefits vacatur against the public interest in the finality of judgment, the Court finds that the latter outweighs the former. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies the Parties’ Joint Rule 60(b)(6) Motion for Relief and Vacatur of the Stipulated Final Judgment and Order [145]. The
Russ Vought's CFPB tried to do a corporate pardon with a mortgage broker who had already entered a final judgment and paid a fine for egregious lending discrimination.
The judge looked at it and said, "No."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
7. As a result of Defendants’ actions, I have been denied the wages, benefits, and resources to which I am legally entitled as an FTC Commissioner. 8. For personal reasons, I can no longer afford to go without any source of income for my family. Applicable rules and regulations limit an FTC Commissioner’s ability to accept other employment while serving on the Commission. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 41 (“No Commissioner shall engage in any other business, vocation, or employment.”). In addition, even assuming I would not be deemed an FTC Commissioner for purposes of such rules and regulations for the duration of this litigation, my acceptance of other employment during the pendency of this litigation could give rise to an appearance of impropriety or to actual or perceived conflicts of interest. 9. Accordingly, and out of an abundance of caution, I formally resigned my position as a Commissioner of the FTC on June 9, 2025.
UPDATE: One of the two FTC commissioners Trump purported to fire in March, Alvaro Bedoya, resigned today because he hasn't been paid since then and, he wrote, "I can no longer afford to go without any source of income for my family." storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
09.06.2025 20:22 — 👍 1132 🔁 427 💬 20 📌 18
