Abstract
Two years after the start of the 2008 financial crisis and during one of the worst economic recessions since the Great Depression, Congress passed a law designed to insure a financial crisis of the same magnitude would not occur again, and if it did, it would not have the same wide-reaching effects the 2008 crisis had. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act sought to, among other things, end “too big to fail,” consolidate the consumer protection agencies, and provide for the orderly liquidation of defaulting systematically important companies. State National Bank of Big Spring v. Geithner, a case filed in D.C. Federal District Court, challenges the constitutionality of the Act’s provisions. This article reviews a subset of the claims raised in that case and argues that certain provisions of the Act are constitutional while others violate the separate of powers inherent in our Constitution.
Recommended Citation
Devon J. Steinmeyer,
Does State National Bank of Big Spring v. Geithner Stand a Fighting Chance?,
89
Chi.-Kent L. Rev.
471
(2014).
Available at:
https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol89/iss1/17
