The Clearing House Association (TCH) joined a joint-trades SCOTUS amicus in support of petitioner in Spokeo Inc. v. Thomas Robbins. The trades argue that “injury in law” claims are incompatible with separation of powers principles and the protections they provide, and that the “injury in fact” requirement ensures that the Executive – not private class action lawyers – retain the ultimate responsibility for enforcing the law and ensures accountability and prevents harmful and unreasonable enforcement actions against regulated parties. Additionally, the trades argue that “injury in law” claims enable abusive class actions on matters that are more appropriately dealt with through government enforcement.
You Might Also Be Interested In...
Amicus Briefs BPI, Trades File Brief Supporting BofA Argument that National Law Preempts N.Y. Mortgage Escrow Rate Requirements
Amicus Briefs BPI, Joint Trades File Amici Brief in Goldman Shareholder Class Action Case Before SCOTUS
Consumer Affairs BPI Files Joint Amici Brief With Other Trades in California v. OCC Case on the OCC’s ‘Madden Fix’ Regulation
Amicus Briefs BPI Submits Amicus Brief in Hymes v. Bank of America National Bank Act Preemption Case
Amicus Briefs BPI Files Amicus Brief on Applicability of HOLA Preemption to Successor Banks in McShannock v. JP Morgan Chase
More Posts by This Author
Bank Capital and Stress Testing U.S. Bank Capital Levels: Aligning With or Exceeding Midpoint Estimates of Optimal
Central Bank Digital Currency BPI’s Paige Pidano Paridon Testifies on CBDC Before House Subcommittee
Bank Activities and Structure BPI Statement Before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion
Bank Activities and Structure BPI Statement Before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy
Basel Finalization BPI’s Greg Baer Testifies on Basel Endgame Before House Financial Services Subcommittee