(Also, just to clarify how Plaid works, Plaid does not share account credentials with Plaid's customers, so you wouldn't be sharing your password with Mint via Plaid. Instead, Plaid provides token-based access to data via an API.)
After looking at those answers and reviewing the relevant parts of Regulation E that it cites, I do feel like the regulation pretty-comprehensively disallows banks to impose liability on the consumer for sharing their password. Answer 8 especially that notes that no waiver of Regulation E is allowed makes me feel more comfortable.
I'd still support an open-banking API law, but your citations here have really turned down the urgency for me on that issue.
(And, yep I'm familiar that Plaid does not share the password beyond itself and the relevant bank it's authenticating with)
I reviewed the register https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2011/12/27/2011-31... and the link you provided.
I don't see anything that would extend the coverage to a service that is providing a read-only view into the account, or anything that mentions password sharing. I _think_ I could see what you're describing in maybe the description of the transitive nature of Regulation E to cover "non-bank payment providers", but I don't see anything that would protect me if I shared my bank password with Mint via Plaid?
I'd love to know more, and as a lay person I'm having a hard time working my way through all the language of Regulation E.