Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
E722003
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the CFPB’s leadership structure unconstitutional because its single director was insulated from presidential removal, reshaping limits on independent agencies.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T8252848 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Context triple: [Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, isCitedIn, Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau]
-
A.
NFIB v. Sebelius
NFIB v. Sebelius is the landmark 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the Affordable Care Act, notably ruling that its individual mandate could be sustained under Congress’s taxing power.
-
B.
King v. Burwell
King v. Burwell is a landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the availability of federal tax credits for health insurance purchased on exchanges under the Affordable Care Act.
-
C.
Eldred v. Ashcroft
Eldred v. Ashcroft is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of extending copyright terms, affirming Congress’s broad power over copyright duration.
-
D.
Bucklew v. Precythe
Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
-
E.
Green v. Biddle
Green v. Biddle was an 1823 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of Kentucky land laws under the Contracts Clause, with an influential opinion authored by Justice Bushrod Washington.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Target entity description: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the CFPB’s leadership structure unconstitutional because its single director was insulated from presidential removal, reshaping limits on independent agencies.
-
A.
NFIB v. Sebelius
NFIB v. Sebelius is the landmark 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that largely upheld the Affordable Care Act, notably ruling that its individual mandate could be sustained under Congress’s taxing power.
-
B.
King v. Burwell
King v. Burwell is a landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the availability of federal tax credits for health insurance purchased on exchanges under the Affordable Care Act.
-
C.
Eldred v. Ashcroft
Eldred v. Ashcroft is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of extending copyright terms, affirming Congress’s broad power over copyright duration.
-
D.
Bucklew v. Precythe
Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
-
E.
Green v. Biddle
Green v. Biddle was an 1823 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of Kentucky land laws under the Contracts Clause, with an influential opinion authored by Justice Bushrod Washington.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
United States constitutional law
ⓘ
administrative law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | March 3, 2020 ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtDecision | John G. Roberts Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| citation | 591 U.S. ___ (2020) ⓘ |
| concernedAgency | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| concurrenceBy |
Clarence Thomas
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Neil M. Gorsuch NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Article II of the United States Constitution
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
separation of powers doctrine ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | June 29, 2020 ⓘ |
| dissentBy | Elena Kagan NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| dissentJoinedBy |
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Sonia Sotomayor NERFINISHED ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 19-7 ⓘ |
| effect |
limited the permissible independence of single-director agencies
ⓘ
made the CFPB director removable by the President at will ⓘ |
| fullName | Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
The CFPB may continue to operate with its director removable by the President at will.
ⓘ
The CFPB’s leadership structure with a single director removable only for cause violates the separation of powers. ⓘ The for-cause removal protection for the CFPB director is unconstitutional. ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
constitutionality of CFPB director’s removal protections
ⓘ
limits on independence of administrative agencies ⓘ scope of presidential removal power ⓘ |
| majorityJoinedBy |
Brett M. Kavanaugh
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED ⓘ Neil M. Gorsuch NERFINISHED ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | John G. Roberts Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| petitioner | Seila Law LLC NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| pluralityPortionJoinedBy |
Brett M. Kavanaugh
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
John G. Roberts Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ Samuel A. Alito Jr. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Humphrey’s Executor v. United States NERFINISHED ⓘ Morrison v. Olson NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| respondent | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| shortName | Seila Law v. CFPB NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted | Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| topic |
independent regulatory agencies
ⓘ
presidential control over executive officers ⓘ removal protections for agency heads ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Description of subject: Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the CFPB’s leadership structure unconstitutional because its single director was insulated from presidential removal, reshaping limits on independent agencies.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
Humphrey’s Executor v. United States
→
isCitedIn
→
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
ⓘ