Judge nixes Biden-era rule removing medical debt from credit reports
Dive Brief:
A federal judge has vacated a rule from the Biden administration that would have removed medical debt from credit reports, in a win for the credit reporting industry.
Judge Sean Jordan, a Trump appointee, said that the rule exceeded the authority of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an independent agency that's been carved out by cuts under the Trump administration.
The CFPB had finalized the rule in January, weeks before former President Joe Biden left office. The Biden administration estimated the regulation, which never went into effect due to legal challenges, would have removed almost $50 billion of medical debt from the credit reports of some 15 million Americans.
Dive Insight:
Two credit reporting trade associations, the Cornerstone Credit Union and the Consumer Data Industry Association, sued to overturn the CFPB's rule earlier this year. The rule would cut into revenue such groups earn from training providers on how to submit medical debt data to credit reporting agencies.
Credit reporting agencies also argued that the rule would make it hard for lenders to get an accurate picture of a consumer's financial status in making loan determinations.
The hollowed-out CFPB under Trump declined to defend its regulation in court. Though a group of clinics and individuals with medical debt stepped up as intervening defendants in the litigation, their arguments were unsuccessful in swaying Jordan that the rule should go into effect.
According to the judge, the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 allows reporting agencies to include information about consumers' medical debt and lenders to consider such information when making credit decisions. The CFPB overstepped in seeking to prevent that, Jordan wrote in his Friday opinion.
The judge's decision to vacate the rule is a stumbling block for those advocating to reduce the burden of medical debt. More than 100 million Americans struggle with medical debt, which is the largest source of debt in collection across the country, the Biden administration said in January.
Roughly 1 in 12 adults have unpaid medical bills of $250 or above, according to an analysis from the Peterson Center on Healthcare and KFF last year.
The bills can weigh on patients' credit scores, suppressing financial opportunities, patient advocates say. That's despite such bills being prone to errors and often the result of one-time medical emergencies, instead of evidence of long-term financial mismanagement.
The rule was part of a larger effort from the Biden administration to crack down on medical debt. A handful of states have also tried to ease the burden of medical debt in recent years, including North Carolina and New Jersey.
'The facts are clear: Medical debt is not predictive of creditworthiness,' said Allison Sesso, the president and CEO of nonprofit Undue Medical Debt, in a statement Monday.
'This decision will hurt people's financial futures, including their ability to buy a home, care for their families, or even get a job — all because they got sick, injured or were born with a chronic condition through no fault of their own. It will also further decrease their willingness to get the care they need,' Sesso added.
The pullback of the rule comes amid a larger Trump administration push to roll back the U.S. safety net, including steep Medicaid cuts in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' passed earlier this month. An estimated 12 million people are expected to lose health insurance as a result of the bill.
Recommended Reading
New rule wipes medical debt from consumer credit reports
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House Slams Joy Behar's Recent Trump Comments And Warns Of ABC's ‘The View' 'Being The Next To Be Pulled Off The Air'
The White House lashed out at Joy Behar after she said on ABC's The View that Donald Trump's attacks on his predecessor, Barack Obama, were motivated by jealousy, while noting the current president's role in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. On Wednesday, Behar and the other View co-hosts talked about Obama's response to Trump's claim that his predecessor was guilty of treason. The Trump administration claims that Obama and his team conspired to alter intelligence assessments to boost the notion Russia was attempting to help Trump get elected in 2016. More from Deadline Candace Owens Accuses Brigitte Macron Of Bullying Her With Defamation Suit Over Claims French First Lady Was Born A Man: "Candace Owens Is Not Shutting Up" - Update Skydance Commits To CBS News Ombudsman, Pledges No DEI Policies As Company Seeks FCC Greenlight Of Paramount Merger Patrick Soon-Shiong Says He Plans To Take Los Angeles Times Public; Shares Will Be Offered Through Regulation A Financing - Update Obama's spokesperson called the allegations 'bizarre' and a 'weak attempt at distraction.' On The View, Behar said, 'First of all, who tried to overthrow the government on January 6th? Who was that again?' Behar added, 'The thing about him is is so jealous of Obama, because Obama is everything that he is not. Trim. Smart. Handsome. Happily married. And can sing Al Green's song Let's Stay Together better than Al Green.' White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said, 'Joy Behar is an irrelevant loser suffering from a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. It's no surprise that The View's ratings hit an all-time low last year. She should self-reflect on her own jealousy of President Trump's historic popularity before her show is the next to be pulled off air.' EW first reported on the White House response. Trump has celebrated the decision by CBS to cancel The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, hosted by another of his critics. On Tuesday, he predicted that ABC's Jimmy Kimmel 'is NEXT to go in the untalented Late Night Sweepstakes and, shortly thereafter, Fallon will be gone. These are people with absolutely NO TALENT, who were paid Millions of Dollars for, in all cases, destroying what used to be GREAT Television. It's really good to see them go, and I hope I played a major part in it!' At the same time, the White House highlighted Trump's claims about 2016. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who has claimed that Obama's team was engaged in 'a years-long coup intended to subvert President Trump's entire presidency,' appeared at the White House press briefing to talk about the release of new documents. That was a 2017 GOP House Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference, casting doubt on the intelligence that Russian President Vladimir Putin favored Trump to win the election. But a 2020 bipartisan report from the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Russia did interfere in the election, while detailing contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russian influence actors. Obama's spokesperson said that 'nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.' On The View, other hosts said that Trump's focus on Obama, and the referral to the Justice Department to investigate, was an attempt to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein story. Alyssa Farah Griffin, who was Trump's director of strategic communications in his first term, said, 'I saw the intelligence that we had. I actually was with Mike Pence when he confronted Vladimir Putin in Signapore and said, 'We know what you tried to do in our elections, Do not do it again.' It was the consensus of the people in the first term, including the director of national intelligence that Russia did try to meddle in our elections.' Best of Deadline Everything We Know About Season 3 Of 'Euphoria' So Far 'Wednesday' Season 2: Everything We Know About The Cast, Premiere Date & More Everything We Know About 'Only Murders In The Building' Season 5 So Far
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court allows Trump to remove 3 Democrats on the Consumer Product Safety Commission
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed the Trump administration to remove three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, who had been fired by President Donald Trump and then reinstated by a federal judge. The justices acted on an emergency appeal from the Justice Department, which argued that the agency is under Trump's control and the president is free to remove commissioners without cause. The three liberal justices dissented. The commission helps protect consumers from dangerous products by issuing recalls, suing errant companies and more. Trump fired the three Democrats on the five-member commission in May. They were serving seven-year terms after being nominated by President Joe Biden. U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox in Baltimore ruled in June that the dismissals were unlawful. Maddox sought to distinguish the commission's role from those of other agencies where the Supreme Court has allowed firings to go forward. A month earlier, the high court's conservative majority declined to reinstate members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, finding that the Constitution appears to give the president the authority to fire the board members 'without cause.' The three liberal justices dissented. The administration has argued that all the agencies are under Trump's control as the head of the executive branch. Maddox, a Biden nominee, noted that it can be difficult to characterize the product safety commission's functions as purely executive. The fight over the president's power to fire could prompt the court to consider overturning a 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey's Executor. In that case from 1935, the court unanimously held that presidents cannot fire independent board members without cause. The decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination, the airwaves and much else. But it has long rankled conservative legal theorists who argue the modern administrative state gets the Constitution all wrong because such agencies should answer to the president. The Consumer Product Safety Commission was created in 1972. Its five members must maintain a partisan split, with no more than three representing the president's party. They serve staggered terms. That structure ensures that each president has 'the opportunity to influence, but not control,' the commission, attorneys for the fired commissioners wrote in court filings. They argued the recent terminations could jeopardize the commission's independence. ___ Mark Sherman, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
USA Today
24 minutes ago
- USA Today
Supreme Court hands Trump a win on Consumer Product Safety Commission firings
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump can fire three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission for now the Supreme Court said on July 23 in the latest decision boosting the ability of the president to control independent agencies. The ruling was made over the objections of the court's three liberal justices. 'Once again, this Court uses its emergency docket to destroy the independence of an independent agency, as established by Congress,' Justice Elena Kagan wrote. "By means of such actions, this Court may facilitate the permanent transfer of authority, piece by piece by piece, from one branch of Government to another." The five-member regulatory commission, created by Congress in 1972, aims to keep people from being injured or killed by defective or harmful products. Commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate in staggered seven-year terms to protect them from political or industry pressure and to protect the agency from abrupt changes in composition. By law, commissioners can be removed only for 'neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.' But, in May, Trump fired without cause the three members appointed by President Joe Biden: Mary Boyle, Alexander Hoehn-Saric and Richard Trumka Jr. A federal judge in Maryland ordered the commissioners reinstated, saying the threat to public safety from removing them outweighed any hardship the administration might suffer from keeping them on while the firings are being challenged. In his June ruling, U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox also said the product safety commission is similar in structure and function to another independent agency that was the center of a landmark 1935 ruling − Humphrey's Executor v. U.S. − limiting the ability of the president to remove independent agency officials. 'Humphrey's Executor remains good law and is binding on this Court,' Maddox wrote. But the Trump administration said Maddox instead should've taken his cue from the Supreme Court's May decision allowing the president to fire Democratic members of two federal labor boards while the former members challenge their dismissals. The product safety commission is now effectively controlled by Biden's appointees even though Trump is president, lawyers for the government said in a filing. Decisions made by the commissioners who are 'hostile' to Trump's agenda have 'thrown the agency into chaos and have put agency staff in the untenable position of deciding which Commissioners' directives to follow,' the Justice Department said. Attorneys for the three commissioners appointed by Biden reminded the Supreme Court that the justices twice in the past year declined to review appeals court decisions that upheld restrictions on the president's ability to remove Consumer Product Safety Commission members without cause. And Maddox, the district judge, noted that the term of one of the three Biden appointees expires in October, giving Trump the chance to appoint her successor and to 'exert significant influence over the agency.'
