A federal appeals court yesterday ruled that the leadership structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is constitutional, reversing a 2016 ruling that found the opposite.

“The Supreme Court has long recognized that, as deployed to shield certain agencies, a degree of independence is fully consonant with the Constitution. The means of independence that Congress chose here is wholly ordinary: The director may be fired only for ‘inefficiency, neglect of duty or malfeasance in office,’ 12 U.S.C. § 5491(c)(3) – the very same language the Supreme Court approved for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) back in 1935,” according to the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit.

The challenge stems from the suit PHH filed against the CFPB over a $109 million fine it assessed the lender in 2015 for kickbacks the agency alleges PHH took for referring customers to mortgage insurers. The U.S. Court of Appeals reduced that fine to $6 million in 2016 and ruled that the inability of the president to remove the CFPB director made the structure of the agency unconstitutional.

The CFPB petitioned the court re-hear the case in full, and the court agreed.

The ruling also found that the Marketing Services Agreements in the PHH case were legal, a decision that pleased the National Association of Realtors.

“The National Association of Realtors is pleased with the court’s reinstatement of the previous decision affirming the legality of marketing service agreements and that they are compliant with RESPA,” NAR President Elizabeth Mendenhall said in a statement. “We’re hopeful this much-needed clarity will address any and all uncertainty moving forward for realtors who have entered into MSAs with settlement and other service providers.”