The fight for the future of the CFPB, explained

The Logoff is a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.

Welcome to The Logoff. Hope you had a good weekend. Today I’m focusing on the Trump administration’s efforts to erase a consumer watchdog agency, both because the agency has an important mission and because the fight for its future has ramifications for the broader struggle over President Donald Trump’s efforts to reshape the government.

What’s going on? The administration is trying to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the federal agency that polices financial services companies (including debt collectors, payday and mortgage lenders, credit reporting companies, and some banks) for customer abuse and fraud. Over the weekend, acting CPFB Director Russell Vought, a Trump appointee, told staff to stop working, essentially paralyzing the agency. By this morning, the agency’s headquarters was closed to almost all employees. 

Is that legal? Congress created the CFPB in 2010 as part of its response to the 2008 financial crisis, and it would take another act of Congress to abolish it.

What’s next? The CFPB employees’ union sued Vought on Sunday, asking a federal judge to immediately freeze Vought’s order and to eventually overturn it. So far, no ruling has been issued.

Why does this all sound familiar? The anti-CFPB moves closely mirror the administration’s attempt to shutter the US Agency for International Development — another dismantling that’s being contested in court.

What’s the broader context? The Trump administration is asserting its right to do away with executive branch agencies whose goals it disagrees with, even if those agencies’ existence is protected by federal law. That’s a power grab that would take more authority away from Congress and hand it to Trump.

Trump’s opponents are asking the courts to block these efforts. So far, judges have several times ordered the administration to stop while cases are considered, but final rulings have not yet come down. We’ll keep tracking them and keep you posted.

And with that, it’s time to log off …

Difficult times are good times to bring people together, but planning a party can be a lot of stress. It doesn’t, however, have to be a lot of stress. Skeptical? I was too. But when my colleague’s 93-year-old grandmother spelled it out, it helped me see how to bring people together without making myself miserable.

Related articles

‘Keep your mouth shut!’ Republican gets earful after ambushing top Dem in hallway



Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) was accused of embarrassing himself after causing chaos in a congressional hallway by confronting House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY).

Instead of meeting with Jeffries in private on Wednesday, Lawler stopped the Democratic leader in front of a crowd of people to ask him to sign on to a temporary extension of subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. Democrats have said that they would not accept only one year of subsidies for the health care program.

"Did your boss, Donald Trump, give you permission?" Jeffries asked.

"He's not my boss!" Lawler insisted. "And by the way, why did you vote to shut the government?"

"You're making a show of this to make yourself relevant," Jeffries charged. "You're embarrassing yourself right now. You're chasing a crowd."

"You have to sign on to the bill," Lawler demanded.

"Let me ask you a question," Jeffries said. "You voted for the 'One Big Ugly Bill,' correct?"

"I voted for a tax cut bill that gave the largest tax cut to Americans in history," Lawler countered. "Are you against that?"

"You're embarrassing yourself right now," Jeffries noted as Lawler talked over him.

"You're not going to talk to me and talk over me because you don't want to hear what I have to say," the Democrat said. "So why don't you just keep your mouth shut?"

"And so you voted for this 'One Big Ugly Bill, a permanent extension of massive tax breaks for your billionaire donors," he added.

Trump’s blunders ‘raise the risk of global conflict’ as enemies ‘gang up’: analyst



After a series of diplomatic blunders, President Donald Trump and America's reputation loss could "raise the risk of global conflict" and come at a major cost, including "mischief or worse" from enemies.

In an opinion piece published Monday, Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth describes how a good reputation can be difficult to obtain or maintain, and Trump "has squandered whatever credibility America had left in foreign and security policy."

Following his rambling speech last week in front of the United Nations and his struggle to see the difference between "personal chemistry" with President Vladimir Putin and diplomatic action, Trump has effectively put both adversaries and allies on edge, wrote Kluth.

"Inklings of danger are everywhere," Kluth writes. "America’s partners are becoming more anxious and making alternative arrangements for their security: Saudi Arabia just signed a defensive pact with Pakistan after watching an Israeli strike against its Gulf neighbor Qatar, which is allied to, but got no help from, the United States. America’s adversaries keep testing the resolve of Trump and the West, as Putin is doing in eastern Europe. Or, like Xi Jinping in Beijing and Kim in Pyongyang, they’re recalculating bellicose scenarios in secret. Other countries, like India, are wary of committing to America and keeping all options open, even clutching hands with Moscow and Beijing."

And although Trump is not the first president to struggle with navigating U.S. reputation among foreign nations, it puts America at an unfortunate future disadvantage.

"Against this backdrop, anybody watching US policy for the past decade, from friendly Europe to adversarial China, already had reason to doubt US credibility. What Trump has done in his second term is to remove the doubts and confirm the loss. Allies now know they can’t trust America, while adversaries are ganging up and recalculating their plans for mischief or worse.

It's unclear what will happen in the future; a damaged reputation jeopardizes diplomacy.

"These responses to America’s loss of credibility will raise the risk of global conflict," Kluth writes. "The danger will go up even more if the US, under this or a future president, panics and decides to overcompensate in reestablishing its reputation, with a demonstratively hawkish turn that could tip into war. If America and the whole world are becoming less safe, it’s because Donald Trump’s foreign policy is, literally, in-credible."

Headlines for October 10, 2025

Israeli Government Approves First Phase of Gaza Ceasefire DealGrand...

Vance heads to Indiana after Republicans warn White House of stalled redistricting push

It marks the vice president's second trip to the Hoosier State over the remapping effort.