Cuomo v. The Clearing House Ass’n, L.L.C.
| Docket No. | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08-453 |
Apr 28, 2009 Tr. |
Jun 29, 2009 | 5-4 | Scalia | OT 2008 |
Issue: Whether 12 USC § 484 and 12 CFR § 7.4000 prohibit measures taken by the New York State Attorney General to enforce state fair lending law against national banks by subjecting those entities to “visitorial powers.â€
Judgment: Affirmed in part and reversed in part, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia on June 29, 2009.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Opinion Recap: Cuomo v. The Clearing House Ass’n, L.L.C.
- Argument Recap: Cuomo v. The Clearing House Ass'n
- Argument Preview: Cuomo v. The Clearing House Ass'n
Briefs and Documents
Merit briefs- Brief for Petitioner Andrew M. Cuomo, in His Official Capacity as Attorney General for the State of New York
- Brief for Respondent the Clearing House Association, L.L.C.
- Brief for Federal Respondents
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Andrew M. Cuomo, In His Official Capacity as Attorney General for the State of New York
- Brief for the Comptroller of the City of New York in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Connecticut Fair Housing Center in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights Under Law, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and the NAACP Legal Defense And Educational Fund, Inc. in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Center for Responsible Lending, AARP, the National Consumer Law Center, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the National Association of Consumer Advocates, South Brooklyn Legal Services, the Consumers Union, Public Citizen, New York City's Department of Consumer Affairs, and the Consumer Federation of America in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the National Governors Association, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities, International City/County Management Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the International Municipal Lawyers Association in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the States of North Carolina, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the American Association of Residential Mortage Regulators in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Conference of State Bank Supervisors in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the National Association of Realtors in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Members of Congress in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the North American Securities Administration Association, Inc., in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Financial Services Roundtable in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the United States Chamber of Commerce in Support of Respondent
- Brief for All Former Comptrollers of the Currency Since 1973 in Support of Respondent
- Brief for American Bankers Association, the Consumer Bankers Association, Alabama Bankers Association, Alaska Bankers Association, Arizona Bankers Association, Arkansas Bankers Association, California Bankers Association, Colorado Bankers Association, Connecticut Bankers Association, Delaware Bankers Association, Florida Bankers Association, Georgia Bankers Association, Hawaii Bankers Association, Heartland Community Bankers Association, Idaho Bankers Association, Illinois Bankers Association, Indiana Bankers Association, Iowa Bankers Association, Kansas Bankers Association, Kentucky Bankers Association, Maine Association of Community Banks, Maryland Bankers Association, Massachusetts Bankers Association, Michigan Bankers Association, Minnesota Bankers Association, Mississippi Bankers Association, Missouri Bankers Association, Montana Bankers Association, Nebraska Bankers Association, Nevada Bankers Association, New Hampshire Bankers Association, New Jersey Bankers Association, New Mexico Bankers Association, New York Bankers Association, North Carolina Bankers Association, North Dakota Bankers Association, Ohio Bankers League, Oklahoma Bankers Association, Oregon Bankers Association, Pennsylvania Bankers Association, Asociacion de Bancos de Puerto Rico, Rhode Island Bankers Association, South Carolina Bankers Association, South Dakota Bankers Association, Tennessee Bankers Association, Texas Bankers Association, Utah Bankers Association, Vermont Bankers Association, Virginia Bankers Association, Washington Bankers Association, West Virginia Bankers Association, Wisconsin Bankers Association, and Wyoming Bankers Association in Support of Respondent
- Opinion below (2nd Circuit)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief in opposition
- Brief of federal respondents in opposition
- Petitioner’s reply
- Brief of the National Association of Realtors (in support of petitioner)
- Brief of Conference of State Bank Supervisors (in support of petitioner)
- Brief of North Carolina, et al. (in support of petitioner)
- Brief of Central New York Citizens in Action, Inc., et al. (in support of petitioner)
