LyrArc Article Gist
A landmark ruling and a huge win for consumers and for the country, as the Supreme Court says states can enforce fair-lending laws and other consumer protection measures against the largest banks in the USA. The Suprem COurt said that the rules issued by the federal banking regulators like the Comptroller of the Currency under the NationalBank Act - a law passed in 1864- could not block sfforts by the states to enforce their laws. For the country its a win because the lack of enforcement of state laws only allowed abuses in the subprime area to continue and helped create the subprime mortgage crisis. The case began with letters by the New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in 2005 to several national banks including CItigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo inquiring about lending practices to minorites. The letters referred to "troubling" disparities that suggested black and Hispanic borrowers were being charged disproportionately higher interest rates on mortgages compared to whites. THe letters asked for information "in lieu of subpoena." Protection of minorities and the weak in American society is part of the moral fabric of America and that it had eroded in recent years is evident in the manner the banking sector responded. A banking trade group and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency brought a lawsuit to block the New York Attorney General's request saying that the National Bank Act nd rules issued by the Bush administration in 2004 gave that type of authority to comptroller and prohibited such efforts by the states. And then afederal district court ruled against the states, aand the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Court affirmed that decision. These are instances where the system failed to protect the weak even with the laws that states had on their books. Justice Scalia voted in favor with a 5-4 vote to allow states to enforce consumer protection laws, even though his written opinion was based on an interpretation of what "visitorial powers" of a federal regulator were, and not about the importance of fair lending in the proper functioning of the American economy. Justices Roberts, Alito, Kennedy and Thomas voted against.