Late last week, Donald Trump signed a pair of executive orders intended to roll back Obama-era rules created to prevent another financial crisis and require brokers to act in their clients’ best interests. The latter, known as the fiduciary rule, was naturally unpopular among Republicans and many in the financial community, with Wall Street cheerleader turned Trump booster Anthony Scaramucci once likening it to the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision, which literally maintained slavery. Goldman Sachs president turned White House National Economic Council director Gary Cohn, meanwhile argued the rule must be quashed because it’s like telling people they can’t have unhealthy food because they “might die younger,” only in this case they’re getting bad financial advice that might leave them broke but line the pockets of their advisers. Let the American people make that choice for themselves!

Unfortunately, a federal judge—it’s always those damn judges, isn’t it?—has told the anti-fiduciary rule crowd to slow their roll. Per Reuters:

The decision [by Chief Judge Barbara Lynn] addressed a sweeping series of legal arguments that Gibson Dunn's attorneys made against the rule, including claims that the Labor Department had exceeded its legal authority and that it had violated federal rule-making procedures by failing to conduct an adequate cost-benefit analysis to help justify the regulation.

“The court finds the DOL adequately weighed the monetary and non-monetary costs on the industry of complying with the rules, against the benefits to consumers,” Lynn wrote. “In doing so, the DOL conducted a reasonable cost-benefit analysis.”

The judge also rejected the claims that the rule “violated free speech rights of brokers and that the rule violated federal laws governing arbitration.“

The groups who hired law firm Gibson Dunn to sue have said they plan to “pursue all of our available options to see that this rule is rescinded.”

But if Wall Street needs a little pick-me-up, perhaps they’ll be heartened to learn that it’s looking like Republicans may prevail in their quest to vanquish a rule that limits financial companies from extracting millions of dollars in overdraft fees from their customers. Georgia Reps. David Perdue and Johnny Isakson argue that the rule, created by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a.k.a. the scourge of congressional Republicans, places an undue burden on prepaid debit card companies. (One prepaid debit card company in particular, the Georgia-based financial company Total System Services, spent $270,000 lobbying Congress in the last three months of 2016, Buzzfeed reports.)

Yes, overdraft fees are a scourge that primarily suck money out of the pockets of the poor, but Republicans (and Total System Services) argue that the fees are just one of a menu of options that should be available to consumers. Isn’t paying an overdraft fee better than falling behind on a bill? The G.O.P., that stalwart defender of liberty, wants to let the poor decide for themselves.