Does one judge have this kind of power?

It will have to be brought by consumer protection groups and could end up at SCOTUS.

It should come before a full appeals court who should strike this decision based on case law cited in the OP.

"So, if Preska’s RD Legal Funding opinion is reviewed by a higher court, there is very little chance that she will be affirmed (though it’s possible that the Supreme Court will ultimately agree with Kavanaugh’s analysis, Henderson and Preska’s reasoning is way out in right field). There is a danger, however, that the Trump administration will refuse to appeal this case — setting off a chaotic series of events where non-parties to the litigation attempt to intervene in the case after the district judge has already handed down a judgment.

In other words, if no one can be found who is both willing and able to appeal this decision, an entire agency set up to protect consumers will cease to exist due to the whim of a single person.


This is the kicker right here:

There is a danger, however, that the Trump administration will refuse to appeal this case — setting off a chaotic series of events where non-parties to the litigation attempt to intervene in the case after the district judge has already handed down a judgment.

In other words, if no one can be found who is both willing and able to appeal this decision, an entire agency set up to protect consumers will cease to exist due to the whim of a single person."

So while everyone is is focusing on other items that this administration is doing, and Mulvaney is in the background attacking the agency, and having judges that are favorable to there filing of claims like these judges that will side with them.........no wonder they want to pack the courts with "judges" that are hell bent on hurting the consumer.......................it boils down to the have's getting more without any push back, and have not's , not having any protection..................this scary, this is third world stuff, of enabling corruption

and by the way ferrets are cool...................

It has been very rewarding to us.

That's simply not true.

This is a joint action by the CFPB and the NYAG. The judge wrongly ordered CFPB removed as a plaintiff to the case, but did not order the agency to be eliminated, as the headline falsely states.

No, the judge didn't order the bureau eliminated. The judge removed the bureau as a party from the case, and will likely be overruled by the Second Circuit.

But the headline is a gross exaggeration of what the judge actually ordered.

http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=634


https://www.americanprogress.org/about/staff/millhiser-ian/bio/

Simply quote the part of the decision where the judge called for the elimination of the bureau. Thank you.

Accordingly, the Court finds that the CFPB “lacks authority
to bring this enforcement action because its composition
violates the Constitution’s separation of powers,” and thus the
CFPB’s claims are dismissed. Fed. Election Comm’n v. NRA
Political Victory Fund, 6 F.3d 821, 822 (D.C. Cir. 1993).

d. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 39)
is DENIED. Because Plaintiff Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau is unconstitutionally structured and lacks authority to
bring claims under the CFPA, the Clerk of Court shall terminate
Plaintiff Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as a party to
this action.

Read the headline of the OP

" judge orders the entire Consumer Financial Protection Bureau eliminated"

Where is that part of the order?

Such a drastic and wide ranging decision had to be paid for by business or political interests.

and their enablers!