ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
This case is before us on remand from the Supreme Court. On initial review, we reversed the judgment of the district court and vacated the Consumer Financial Protection Bureaus 2017 Payday Lending Rule based on our conclusion that the Bureaus funding structure violated the Appropriations Clause. 51 F.4th 616, 635–44 (5th Cir. 2022). The Supreme Court reversed our judgment and held that the Bureaus funding structure is constitutional. Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Cmty. Fin. Servs. Assn of Am., Ltd., 601 U.S. 416, 441, ––– S.Ct. ––––, ––– L.Ed.2d –––– (2024). Though it reversed our judgment in its entirety, the Court did not address the other issues we decided in the case. See 51 F.4th at 626–35.
Accordingly, we REINSTATE our judgment affirming the district courts ruling in favor of Defendants based on Plaintiffs’ alternative arguments, and we RENDER judgment in favor of Defendants declaring that the Bureaus funding structure, and thereby the Payday Lending Rule, is constitutional.
Plaintiffs shall have fourteen days after entry of this opinion to file a petition for panel rehearing. See Fed. R. App. P. 40(a)(1). Plaintiffs’ letter filed May 16, 2024, see Fed. R. App. P. 28(j), is STRICKEN for noncompliance with the rule.
Per Curiam: