Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Lawmakers back NTEU in CFPB shutdown dispute with en banc amicus filing, (Feb 11, 2026)

By Shashi Kant, BALLB, LLM

Members of Congress argue executive officials lack authority to disable a congressionally created agency through operational actions without legislation.

Nearly 200 members of Congress urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, sitting en banc, to reject “the Trump administration’s attempts to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” and to uphold limits on actions taken by Acting CFPB Director Russell Vought, according to an amicus brief filed in support of plaintiffs led by the National Treasury Employees Union (National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought, No. 25-5091 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)).

Background. The amicus filing comes in litigation brought by the National Treasury Employees Union and allied plaintiffs challenging actions they allege were intended to dismantle the CFPB. In March 2025, a federal district court entered a preliminary injunction restricting workforce reductions and operational changes at the Bureau. A divided D.C. Circuit panel later vacated that injunction (see Banking and Finance Law Daily, Dec. 18, 2025). The full court subsequently granted rehearing en banc, vacated the panel judgment, and scheduled oral argument for Feb. 24, 2026, while leaving a partial stay pending appeal in effect.

Amicus brief by lawmakers. The amicus brief was led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Cal.), and joined by every Senate Democrat and Independent, as well as additional current and former members of Congress. According to the brief, the lawmakers argue that the administration’s actions went beyond permissible changes in policy priorities and instead amounted to an effort to eliminate an agency created by Congress. The brief states that Congress vested the CFPB with mandatory statutory duties and that executive officials lack authority to suspend or terminate those functions without legislative action.

Alleged shutdown actions. According to the amicus brief, actions taken after Russell Vought assumed leadership of the CFPB included issuing stop-work orders, terminating contracts, closing offices, cutting off funding, and firing probationary and term-limited employees. The lawmakers wrote that these steps, taken together, crossed the line between ordinary administrative discretion and disabling the Bureau’s ability to carry out its statutory mandates. The brief states that such actions prevented the CFPB from performing core functions assigned by Congress, including supervision, enforcement, and consumer protection activities.

Separation-of-powers arguments. The lawmakers contend in the brief that permitting the executive branch to effectively shutter a congressionally created agency would undermine the constitutional allocation of powers. According to the brief, Congress deliberately insulated the CFPB to ensure continued performance of its consumer protection mission, and courts have a role in preventing executive action that nullifies statutory mandates. The amicus brief states that judicial review is necessary to ensure that statutory limits on executive authority are enforced.

News: LitigationNewsTrends LaborNews AgencyNews EconomicNews