Supreme Court Decision Strikes Blow against Tribal Online Payday Lenders

nclcBy NCLC

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 29, 2014

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) A Supreme Court decision yesterday will have serious repercussions for illegal online payday lenders who claim to be affiliated with a Native American tribe, according to National Consumer Law Center attorneys with expertise in payday lending and tribal sovereign immunity. Although the decision in Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community was a victory for the tribe (which was resisting a state lawsuit over the tribe’s illegal casino), the Court’s reasoning demonstrates that tribal-affiliated payday lenders are not above the law.

“The game is up for payday lenders who attempt to cloak illegal conduct in tribal immunity,” said National Consumer Law Center Associate Director Lauren Saunders. “The Supreme Court’s decision makes clear that purportedly tribal payday lenders who loan off-reservation must comply with state laws, including interest rate caps and state licensing laws, and that courts can enter an injunction stopping illegal lending—even by tribal entities.”

In a key passage in its decision, the Supreme Court emphasized that when a tribe conducts activity off-reservation, a state “has many other powers” beyond suing the tribe directly. “’Indians going beyond reservation boundaries’ are subject to any generally applicable state law”; the state may “deny a license.” If a tribe goes ahead with unlicensed activity, the state “could bring suit against tribal officials or employees (rather than the Tribe itself) seeking an injunction for, say, gambling without a license,” or even pursue criminal charges.

The Court stated strongly that a state “can shutter, quickly and permanently, an illegal casino,” and the same is true for illegal payday loans that claim a tribal affiliation. “First, both states and consumers can obtain court injunctions stopping tribal payday lenders from making or collecting illegal loans,” explained Saunders. “Second, off-reservation loans that violate state laws are unquestionable illegal even if made by a tribal entity, and any attempt by a payment processor, the payday lender’s bank, or a debt collector to take the money out of a consumer’s account is unauthorized and illegal.”

“Tribal sovereignty is an important principle that respects the dignity of nations mistreated throughout American history,” added Andrew Pizor, staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. “Fortunately, the Supreme Court decision affirms that states need not tolerate payday lenders attempting to use tribal sovereignty as a shield for illegal conduct.”

Related materials:

Supreme Court Decision Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-515_jq2i.pdf

NCLC’s body of work re: payday lending: http://www.nclc.org/issues/payday-loans.html.

###

Since 1969, the nonprofit National Consumer Law Center® (NCLC®) has worked for consumer justice and economic security for low-income and other disadvantaged people, including older adults, in the U.S. through its expertise in policy analysis and advocacy, publications, litigation, expert witness services, and training. www.nclc.org

Using e-mail is inherently insecure. Confidential information, including account numbers, credit card numbers, etc., should never be transmitted via e-mail or e-mail attachment. NCLC is not responsible for the loss or unauthorized disclosure of confidential information sent to NCLC via e-mail or attachment. This e-mail message is confidential and/or privileged and is for the use of the intended recipient only. All other use is prohibited.

CONTACTS: Lauren Saunders (lsaunders@nclc.org); Andrew Pizor (apizor@nclc.org); or Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org) or 617.542.8010

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
September 22, 2024
The debtor’s family expense for nonessential taekwondo training and gym memberships demonstrated an abuse of Chapter 7 and the case would be dismissed unless converted to a Chapter 13.
Members
davis26
June 4, 2023
Can a debtor provide for a non-debtor’s loan under § 1322(b)(5) even if the plan does not address a non-monetary default on the claim? In re Lazaro suggests the answer may be “yes.” In that case, the Court held not only that the Debtor’s plan could provide to cure a monetary default on a loan taken out by the Debtor’s...
Members
NN Photo
September 11, 2022
In a recent opinion, the 9th Circuit BAP affirmed a bankruptcy judge’s decision that sanctions order by a state court were nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6)i and that the state court proceeding precluded litigating the issue in bankruptcy.ii The sanctions originate from a California doctor’s defamation suit against two former patients. The Doctor initiated the action against two women who wrote...
Members
July 24, 2021
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Wonk Alert This Part 2 wraps up some suggestions about how the parties to residential mortgages may avoid or minimize problems in the structuring and administration of these loans, with a discussion of subsection 1111(b) of Bankruptcy Code.1 This discussion may seem arcane, as indeed many experienced Chapter 11 practitioners...
Members
moran_cathy
January 23, 2022
The no man's land between the mortgage due date and late payment is a persistent trouble spot for Chapter 13 practitioners. Are there arrears when the case is filed during the grace period and the payment made before it was late? In Borre, Judge Ronald Sargis of ED CA said no. He held that the payment was not in default...
Members
November 1, 2020
By James J. Robinson, Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Alabama Under what circumstances should the trustee object to claims (assuming a purpose would be served under § 707(a)(5))? Midland Funding, LLC v. Johnson, 137 S. Ct. 1407 (2017). This case centered around the debtor’s argument that a creditor violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act when it...
Members
enmark
March 23, 2025
This excellent piece, from the archives, is as current today as it was when it first ran in October of 2023. “Under names like Affirm, Klarna, Afterpay, and Sezzle, these companies finance online purchases for the consumer.”
Members
William-1_print_2019
The Federal Judicial Center has published, online, Judge William H. Brown’s second edition of an overview of Chapter 7 and 13 bankruptcy - Consumer Bankruptcy Law: Chapters 7 & 13, Second Edition
Consumer Bankruptcy Education
November 30, 2025
TODAY amendments to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002.1 take effect, and with these amendments come six new Official Forms, one revised Official Form, and a new Director’s Form. Please click here to view the new forms. Check applicable court websites for new docketing events and new local rules.
April 11, 2021
By Kara K. Gendron, Esquire, Mott & Gendron Law (Harrisburg, PA) If a Chapter 13 Debtor has adopted a child who is eligible for assistance under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act, should those funds which were received in the six months prior to filing the petition be included in the Official Form 122C–1 Chapter 13 Statement of Current...
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: