**By Brandon Fiquett Sentient Commons May 15, 2025**

Abstract

In May 2025, the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) officially withdrew a proposed rule that would have enforced consent requirements for the sale of sensitive personal data by third-party brokers. This decision, spearheaded by Acting Director Russell Vought, reflects a growing deregulatory agenda that endangers consumer autonomy, national security, and the ethical foundations of digital society. This article outlines the policy reversal, the actors involved, and the implications for civil liberties in the context of increasing state-corporate convergence.

1. Introduction

The commodification of personal data—location history, biometric identifiers, religious affiliation, financial records—is not a future threat. It is an ongoing crisis. At the heart of this surveillance economy lies the opaque and largely unregulated data brokerage industry, a sector estimated to exceed $250 billion globally by 2025 (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2023).

In December 2024, under Director Rohit Chopra, the CFPB proposed a regulation titled “Protecting Americans from Harmful Data Broker Practices.” The rule sought to classify data brokers under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), requiring them to obtain informed consent before collecting or reselling personal data. However, as of May 14, 2025, this rule has been rescinded (Federal Register, 2025).

2. Key Stakeholders and Motivations

2.1 Regulatory Sabotage by Political Appointees

Russell Vought, formerly the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, cited an updated “interpretation” of the FCRA in withdrawing the rule (WIRED, 2025). Critics, including Sean Vitka of Demand Progress and veterans’ group Common Defense, condemned the move as a deliberate capitulation to data brokers, with no clear public safety rationale.

2.2 Corporate Lobbying and the Fintech Complex

The Financial Technology Association (FTA)—a trade group representing fintech firms—issued a formal letter opposing the regulation, arguing it would “exceed statutory mandate” and “hinder fraud prevention” (FTA Letter, May 2025). This language mirrors industry patterns of framing data extraction as a security necessity—a rhetorical inversion used to justify surveillance capitalism (Zuboff, 2019).

3. The Real-World Harm of Unregulated Data Trade

3.1 National Security Risks

A 2023 research study funded by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point concluded that current data broker practices pose a “clear and present threat to U.S. national security” by facilitating the identification and targeting of military personnel through de-anonymized datasets (Sherman et al., 2023).

Data leaked by firms such as Gravy Analytics and Mobilewalla have exposed granular movements of political officials, defense contractors, and active service members (WIRED, 2023).

3.2 Personal Safety and Domestic Abuse

According to the Safety Net Project of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, people-search engines that purchase brokered data can allow abusers to track victims even after relocation or identity changes (TechSafety.org, 2024).

4. The CFPB’s Gutting: Dismantling Accountability

As reported by WIRED, more than 1,400 CFPB employees were laid off in April 2025, leaving only a skeletal agency incapable of meaningful enforcement (WIRED, 2025). This administrative evisceration coincided with calls from Elon Musk—now head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—to eliminate the CFPB entirely (WIRED, 2025).

The result is not just deregulation—it is decapitation.

Consent, in data ethics, is not merely symbolic. It is foundational. Its removal creates a legal architecture in which involuntary surveillance becomes normalized—a system that philosopher Shoshana Zuboff describes as “a coup from above” (Zuboff, 2019).

5.2 International Precedents and Comparative Models

The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) enshrines consent, data minimization, and the right to be forgotten—principles absent from the American regulatory landscape (GDPR.eu, 2024). The U.S. is increasingly anomalous in permitting corporate actors to commodify behavioral data without opt-in mechanisms.

6. Recommendations

  1. Reinstate and Expand the CFPB’s Mandate
    Include specific language affirming FCRA applicability to data brokers.

  2. Enact Federal Opt-In Privacy Legislation
    Modeled after GDPR, with criminal penalties for violations.

  3. Publicly Funded Watchdog Infrastructure
    Create independent data rights enforcement bodies with authority to audit brokers.

  4. Citizen Literacy and Encryption Campaigns
    Empower the public with tools to resist passive data harvesting.

Conclusion

The revocation of the CFPB’s proposed rule is not just a policy shift. It is a moral failure—one that reveals the fragile illusion of control in the digital age. To reclaim that control, we must redefine data rights as human rights, and dismantle the structures that mistake consent for inconvenience.

If the state will not defend us from predation, then we must defend each other.

References

Updated: