The plaintiffs in National Association of Industrial Bankers v. Weiser filed their supplemental en banc brief in the Tenth Circuit last week, urging the full court to affirm the district court’s preliminary injunction against Colorado’s HB 23-1229. That injunction, blocking Colorado from enforcing its opt-out statute against out-of-state state-chartered banks, remains in effect.
The core dispute turns on a single phrase in Section 525 of DIDMCA: “loans made in such State.” Colorado reads that as covering any loan to a Colorado borrower, regardless of where the lender operates. The plaintiffs don’t agree: the phrase refers to where the bank is located, not the borrower, and they point to a telling omission: Congress used “made or executed” in a companion statute three months earlier but didn’t include “executed” in Section 525. Deliberate, they say.
The amicus coalition that filed on June 4 covers nearly every segment of the banking system: the FDIC and OCC filed in support of the plaintiffs, alongside the American Bankers Association, 50 state bankers associations, 21 state attorneys general, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The read-across for other states is direct: if the Tenth Circuit en banc sides with Colorado’s borrower-location theory, every state wanting to cap rates on out-of-state online lenders has its blueprint. The FDIC and OCC intervened because a Colorado win would fracture the uniform federal lending framework both agencies administer, and neither wanted that precedent set on their watch.
Colorado’s opposition brief is due July 8, 2026, after the state secured an extension from June 29. Oral argument before the full en banc court is set for August 18, 2026.
— James Okafor