In a recent legal development, a federal judge appointed during the Trump administration has temporarily blocked a Biden administration rule that aimed to cap late fees for credit card users. The move comes as a setback for President Biden’s efforts to protect consumers from excessive financial burdens.

Introduced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the measure sought to cut late payment fees from $32 to $8. However, the new ruling, made by U.S. District Judge Mark T. Pittman, puts a pause on the implementation of the rule, which was set to take effect this month.

Judge Pittman’ decision follows a lawsuit filed by several banking industry groups challenging the legality of the rule. These groups argued that the Biden administration had overstepped its authority by imposing restrictions on the fees that financial institutions could levy on their customers. Judge Pittman sided with the plaintiffs, granting their request for a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the rule.

“The credit card lobby’s lawsuit is an attempt to derail a rule that will save families $10 billion each year in order to continue making tens of billions of dollars in profits by charging borrowers late fees that far exceed their actual costs,” a CFPB spokesperson told CNN after the ruling. “We will continue to defend this rule so that working families can stop paying excessive late fees that Congress banned more than a decade ago.”

The Biden administration had justified the rule as a necessary measure to protect consumers from unfair and excessive charges, particularly during times of economic hardship. Proponents of the regulation argued that high late fees could disproportionately harm low-income individuals and those facing financial difficulties.

However, opponents, including the banking industry, contended that the rule would have negative consequences for financial institutions and could ultimately restrict access to credit for consumers. They maintained that credit card companies needed flexibility in setting fees to account for the risks associated with lending and to cover administrative costs.

The ruling by Judge Pittman represents a temporary victory for opponents of the fee cap, but the legal battle is likely far from over. The Biden administration may appeal the decision, seeking to overturn the injunction and proceed with the implementation of the rule. In the meantime, the outcome of this case underscores the ongoing debate surrounding consumer protection measures and the balance between regulating financial practices and maintaining a competitive marketplace.