This is a case that has been under the radar with the whole Sotomayer reverse discrimination case but I think it has far more impact on most people though it was sort of a discrimination case to begin with.
For those who don't know about it this was a case that contested whether states could hold big multi national banks accontable to state regulations.
Here are some of the specifics.
Suspecting racially discriminatory lending practices, the Attorney General of New York State sent letters of inquiry
to numerous national banks requesting information about their lending practices and warning them of the potential illegality of their acts. The Office of the Controller of the Currency ("OCC") and the Clearing House
Association L.C.C., which consists of several national banks, maintained that the National Bank
Act's "visitorial powers" provisions, interpreted by the OCC in 12
C.F.R. § 7.4000, bar states from enforcing state laws against national banks. The Attorney General argues that the OCC's interpretation of § 7.4000
violates the Administrative Procedures Act, and that the National Bank Act's "visitorial
powers" provisions do not interfere with state enforcement of their generally applicable laws. The decision in this case may affect lending practices and
the balance of power between the federal government and state governments.
This is where I got it from.
anyway the supreme court ruled states do have a right to enforce state regulations on them which is great for consumer protection rights.
What aggravated me about this case was the actions of supreme dick head John C. Dugan. While most of us never really heard of him he is the Comptroller of
the Currency for the OCC. He fought this tooth and nail all the way to the supreme court then had the audacity to release this statement after the
verdict.
While the OCC naturally is disappointed that the Court disagreed with the OCC's interpretation of the scope of visitorial powers under the National Bank Act, everyone benefits from clarification of the law. We will continue to look for ways to improve collaboration and cooperation between the OCC and the states. I want to stress that the OCC is absolutely committed to strong oversight and enforcement of the fair lending laws, and that the OCC and the states share a common goal of ensuring fair access to financial services and fair treatment of consumers and businesses by all financial firms. We look forward to working with the states to ensure that these important objectives are met.
http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/release/2009-75.htm
Dude you in no way shape or form wanted fair and tough oversight. Quit acting like you did.
here is the text of the verdict.
