Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
"the very first judge who granted motion to dismiss (and also said we were not ripe) SAID our BEEF IS WITH CONGRESS !!!"
Not really. In a big picture, Congress tried to do its job for that moment in 2008 crisis even though many lawmakers were not innocent. Congress mostly depends on bureaucrats in executive branch for understanding the needs of the time in a crisis.
It is the revolving door bureaucrats and lobbyists who took advantage of it by first fomenting the crisis and then demanding overwhelming powers to solve the problem with the assurance that those overwhelming powers mostly will not be needed or will not be used. However those powers were abused as soon as they got them and tuned the US financial crisis in to Global meltdown. Unfortunately Congress has not abolished HERA even after knowing the extensive damage HERA caused to the very foundation of free market economy and the global financial system.
The revolving door bureaucrats and lobbyists have been playing this game for long time. They make Congress to pass unconstitutional (or controversial) laws and then make executive branch to misinterpret or make unconstitutional decisions. They know very well that it will take decades for victims of their scam to get if any justice from judiciary. Most of the time judiciary is pro-Gov and judiciary takes years to find out legal loop holes or excuses to rule in Gov's favor. In the worst case scenario like in recent Collin's ruling, they even ruled that unconstitutional laws and unconstitutional executive decisions are lawful and asked victims to seek damages. Also SCOTUS rewrote HERA to make it look better even though writing laws is the exclusive authority of Congress.
Is it not better if all the three branches of Gov collaborate with each other before creating new laws and make sure that laws are constitutional and prevent victimizing common people with unconstitutional laws and decisions? Is it not better for all if SCOTUS makes sure that all the laws are constitutional before they are even passed rather than SCOTUS rewrite the laws after decades.
"Here is a link to the article. It says that the AIG case is different than the GSEs because AIG would have had no value had the government stepped in a saved them. "
AIG was never bankrupt. It was liquidity problem. If AIG were to get help when they needed liquidity (<20B) then AIG would have never needed bigger amounts (200B).
In fact there was a private investor who was ready to buy AIG, but Hank did not allow it (please read in his book). With his rescue scam, major beneficiaries were his WS companies that received in billion for default insurance contracts. The court decision was another scam, a typical pro-gov and anti common people ruling.
In fact Hank did the same with FnF even though FnF never needed any help.
Hank also did the same with many banks, imposing Gov bailout even when they never needed it. With this Hank made a smaller crisis look like very big crisis and caused Global financial meltdown.
"I do believe the SCOTUS decision was horrible and worse"
Overall the decision was horrible but may not be that horrible for FnF shareholders.
Did SCOTUS follow its own legal principles in arriving at its ruling? It has been losing credibility for long time and this one is a large dark spot.
How can unconstitutional laws and unconstitutional executive decisions be lawful?
HERA is such a law and FHFA/FHFA Conservator's decisions were unconstitutional.
SCOTUS should have sent HERA back to congress rather than remanding the case. Why would SCOTUS rewrite HERA when HERA does not have severability clause.
"The higher courts apparently have no balls to make a decision that would affect the entire economy, so they are leaving a momentous decision like this to lower courts. That's my read."
The Bush/Hank administration should take the blame for this mess. Congress trusted and passed HERA without even reading it with the understanding that it is similar to the laws that Govern FDIC and will solve the economic crisis. SCOTUS ruling proves that HERA is not similar FDIC laws in any way.
Now knowing how the Hank/lobbyists used HERA to create worst global crisis by imposing conservatorship on FnF, Congress and administration should abolish HERA immediately. This will avoid another crisis in the future.
" All they accomplished was creating even more problems than before they started."
100% correct. Any novice apolitical judge would have done a far superior job.
God only knows how such a SCOTUS ruling will set precedents for future cases in lower courts.
"The courts are all afraid of-their-own-shadow Embarrassing to see so many judges running and hiding under a desk every time a tough decision needs to be made."
The most lawless aspect of HERA is, there have been numerous FnF cases where HERA has been interpreted in numerous contradictory ways by all kinds of courts/judges including SCOTUS, FHFA Directors, Administration, media, lawmakers, independent legal experts and shareholders.
Even SCOTUS was not able to clarify all the controversial clauses of the HERA and conveniently chose to kick the can down the road. SCOTUS has not made it any easy for anyone. It is not clear how it is going to playout further in lower courts.
BTW who should be credited for creating such a lawless law? Why lawmakers and administration want to continue with such a lawless laws created by the vested interests?
Clearly FnF and HERA are political controversies thrown on judiciary to solve. Why would not politicians resolve the decades old problem (that they have created) in the best of all and the country? Obviously judiciary has shown that it is incapable of solving this problem.
"The Montilla Plaintiffs want the First Circuit to revisit
FHFA’s status as a government actor in light of the Collins
decision."
All most all FnF cases have to be reviewed by all the courts.
FHFA attorneys will be busy full time. Unfortunate thing is FnF will be paying for the lawless decisions of FnF conservator.
"Presidential authority to fire FHFA Director has zero to do with anything other than a technically. Had no impact on GSE operations."
All know why. He is a de facto paper tiger with no real decision making power. He has no real power or organization to enforce any decision against the will of the administration.
Main duties and responsibilities are to serve as a subterfuge proxy agency for the administration and lawmakers.
For a completely unaccountable independent agency nobody is accountable for any unconstitutional or unlawful decisions. It can not be any simpler than this.
Can any one or SCOTUS explain why private FnF conservatorship matters are protected by top secret classification.
"If that’s truly what SCOTUS intentionally did, they are simply irresponsible."
Surely they did not behave responsibly. They abused the immense power to alter constitution without any ratification normally required for changing constitution.
SCOTUS ruled that there was constitutional violation and Plaintiffs are entitled compensation under taking clause. But SCOTUS refused to rule that the laws (HERA) and FHFA decisions are unlawful. Is this not a contradiction or joke of worst kind?
In simple words, SCOTUS ruled that congress can create unconstitutional laws and executive branch can violate constitution and all are lawful.
Only available justice for people is to seek compensation.
If SCOTUS starts extending this principle, Gov can do any thing, any constitutional violations are lawful and only remedy is compensation.
Look like SCOTUS has abdicated its duty to defend the constitution.
"Your answer was wrong. Capital isn't the difference between assets and liabilities.
That's the Net Worth.
I'm telling you that their current Core Capital is - $151 billion, published by FnF quarterly. Don't shoot the messenger."
"Core capital" criteria is never used for insurance companies.
"Core Capital" criteria is used for institutions like banks.
BTW FnF are private mono Insurance companies and it a fraud and mismanagement to use "Core capital" criteria for FnF.
Donotunderstand,
It is not just one point but numerous points conclusively prove that it was the mob attack by revolving door bureaucrats lead by Hank.
HERA reads like mob hand book. Why would any one create a lawless HERA to regulate FnF? Was not HUD good enough to regulate FnF?
Is there any justification for mob treatment of FnF.
"Instead they modified HERA when they have no business writing new Law. "
Agree. SCOTUS thinks laws do not apply to it.
"Government used to be able to get away with that. Now the 11,000 unsealed documents will be available August 4. Plaintiffs need to show them and prove the government lied."
One can prove that revolving door bureaucrats conspired, falsified and lied in a trial. But foxy FHFA has been able to suppress all the factual truth with summary judgements and also has been successful in inserting its false narratives in court rulings. Amazingly courts have ignored plaintiffs pleadings but have accepted defendants pleadings. Courts have opportunistically continued to ignore the facts in discovered documents.
"We all know this for a long time. The whole thing is a highway robbery. The GSEs did not need the bailout. Or, at least, they did not need this much. And, why 10% interest with all other TBTFs at 4% ? NWS is to rob us the second time. But, how do we get all this to the public or at least to the judges in our coming trials ? SCOTUS is a disgrace already."
Looking back, the main problem here seems to be that the plaintiffs are playing by the self defeating mischievous Game rules (innocent looking lawless HERA) set up by the wall street lobbyists.
HERA is basically a disguised communist manifesto suitable in a communist country. With laws like HERA who needs pesky constitution! This is what communists do to abolish democracy, capitalism and free market economy. BTW look at the background of the people who created HERA. Most are supporters of communist Chaina.
Here the main culprit is lawless HERA. HERA fails on many constitutional and commonly accepted legal principles. Judge Lamberth made this very clear in his first opinion and said shareholders should have grievance with Congress, so investors should take up their grievances with lawmakers.
FnF shareholders need to follow up with Congress and Administration to abolish HERA and replace it with laws compliant with constitution and commonly accepted legal principles.
As for as judiciary is concerned, it has miserably failed in meeting its constitutional duties and obligations to people. Judiciary is using some or the other excuses to kick the can down the road. SCOTUS ruling is full of cruel jokes for long suffering shareholders. May be judiciary is totally confused with laws like lawless HERA.
HERA is the main root sickness. FHFA, Conservatorship, NWS etc.. are just symptoms.
Plaintiffs should focus on getting lawless HERA abolished in courts rather than seek reliefs from symptoms like lawless conservatorship, NWS etc...
"So Watt's a fair price for all dat?"
Main concern is lower court judges (like apex court) will opportunistically use the fake narratives of FHFA that FnF were on the brink of collapse and without the Gov bailout FnF would not have survived and shareholders would have lost all their value. All along all courts have been using this fake narratives in their rulings.
Gov fake narratives have been proven to be false through discovery process and forensic accounting analysis. But so far no judge is considering these facts in their rulings. These judges are doing everything possible to hide these factual truths and deny justice to plaintiffs.
Probably only jury trial may have some hope for shareholders. Unlike pro-Gov biased judges, jurors may not ignore the factual truth.
"please continue bitching and moaning until we're trading for a Quarter coz I've not had a good reason to clean my couch cushions in a long time big smile"
mrfence,
Never trust people in power, that too unelected unaccountable people with absolute power. This is THE fundamental principle on which US Constitution is designed.
But founders totally underestimated the power of the independent Gov Branches that are run with unelected unaccountable people with almost absolute power. Even far worse is the Gov branch that is run with unelected unaccountable people with life time tenure with absolute power.
FnF Shareholders had lot of hope and trust in SCOTUS. But clearly from the reactions of legal scholars and common people, SCOTUS betrayed that hope and trust. This is not because, SCOTUS mostly ruled against plaintiffs but the way SCOTUS ignored many legal principles and legal mandates that all expected it to follow. Looks like SCOTUS allowed itself to be guided by political ideologues and think tanks run by lobbyists. With this ruling SCOTUS has opened the Pandoro's box, and has destabilized the financial system. How would anyone trust what Gov says in a crisis with the experience of FnF conservatorship?
If one were to go by the the way SCOTUS has ruled in this case, lower court judges will be falling over each other to please the defendants with even far worse ruling, abandoning all legal principles and constitutional rights of people.
Let us hope that the brave and the patriotic judges will prove all the skeptics wrong. This country has many of such people. Let us hope that current/future administrations, Congress, UST and FHFA will prove all the skeptics wrong and restore the faith of the people in their own Gov.
"There will be a worse recession one day, and this conservatorship and the court rulings will be the cause of that recession becoming 10x worse.
"
Yes, this is very possible scenario. Bush, Hank, Barry, FHFA Directors, HERA, Judiciary ... will be remembered for this.
"Your criticism of the legislation while valid is misdirected at SCOTUS. SCOTUS didn't write it and they would likely agree with much of your assessment. "
Judiciary is co-equal branch of legislative and executive branch, and has equal responsibility to defend the constitution and the rights of the people.
Founders did not design and write the constitution to protect Gov from people. Founders did design and write the constitution to protect people from Gov.
However Judiciary consistently always defends Gov, works in the best interest of itself and also most of the time it is against common people. This is exactly opposite of founder's design of constitution.
If HERA is a bad law then Judiciary needs to say so and cancel it. HERA does not have severability clause, then why did SCOTUS rewrite the HERA clauses?
"Shareholders will demand it opposed to a government bailout because the shareholders will most likely fair way better with bankruptcy, opposed to bailout (read bailout as: government will steal everything including the kitchen sink)."
Louie_Louie, This is a very good analysis and prediction. People will suffer in economic crisis because of such betrayal of investor's trust. How can any one trust such bureaucrats in a crisis with such betrayal of trust.
"SCOTUS didn't write HERA or any of the legislation that lead us here."
Your arguments supporting Judiciary (especially apex court) makes no sense.
HERA is a copy of laws Governing FDIC (Bank deposit insurance Corporation and supervisor for banks). FHFA is bureaucratic regulator regulating FnF (mono line insurance companies). Who in the world uses banking regulations to regulate mono line insurance companies?
HERA is an Act of Gov tyranny and bureaucratic abuse imposed on private FnF and shareholders. HERA fails on most common sense logic, facts and every basic legal principle. These flaws are clearly visible in SCOTUS ruling.
SCOTUS needed 6 months to find ways to rule in favor of defendants, otherwise it did not need even a week to rule in favor of plaintiffs. Courts should have questioned Gov on creating such laws and using such laws to punish private FnF and shareholders.
Laws like HERA have no place in a democratic and free market capitalistic economy. Court Should have abolished and defended the basic freedoms from Gov encroachment and tyranny.
"but with an implicit --- or explicit guarantee - there is consideration"
If FnF had any of these then what was the need to impose conservatorship and manipulate the books to chain them to CONCRETE LIFE PRESERVERs?
Implicit guarantee was invented by the professional crooks to rob and destroy FnF.
"Duty to Serve plays an important part in this.
Under the Safety and Soundness Act, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are each charged with a duty to 'provide leadership' in facilitating a secondary market in mortgages for families in three specific underserved markets:
(1) Affordable housing preservation,
(2) Manufactured Housing, and
(3) Rural markets"
Is this not using private companies for public use without compensation?
What about FHFA conservator robbing FnF? Does this also comes under duty to serve and whom?
"Yup, SCOTUS slapped da ball back to da lower courts for final Judgement..."
Looks like SCOTUS ignored or glossed over every principle it follows normally and made every possible exception to the rules, to legalize mistreating and robbing the conservatees by conservators.
May be SCOTUS could have given another legally sounding name to this kind of conservator.
If this ruling were to set the precedents then it will completely destabilize the capital markets and economy.
Probably SCOTUS needs some one outsider to audit their reckless rulings.
"The Supreme Court is another branch of Wall Street."
Yes, All had very high expectations from SCOTUS and SCOTUS failed all badly.
Plaintiff should protest such erroneous and controversial SCOTUS ruling.
At least they should file a revision petition pointing out all the glaring issues in the ruling and how it is going to destabilize the banking system and capital markets.
In fact The Gov itself should do this to protect the system and assure capital markets that conservatorship and receivership will retain their usual traditional meaning.
"Apparently, dissenting opinions means I disagree with your opinions but I will vote 9-0 to support your opinions with which I disagree. I do so because I'm an idiot with no backbone."
Yes, For Judges, laws, logic, facts, constitutional duty, honesty, conscience do not matter as long as end result is self serving and politically correct.
"There's no breach of the constitution, then there is no constitutional claim."
US Constitution prohibits Gov from taking private property without proper compensation. It does not matter how Gov takes the private property whether complying with some laws or without complying with the laws or misinterpreting the laws.
Under principles of constitutional avoidance SCOTUS should have interpreted the statutory HERA so as to avoid ruling based on 5th amendment. A simple statutory ruling that NWS is illegal would have complied with this principle.
HERA says that conservator can act its own interest under incidental powers. HERA does not explicitly authorize Conservator to take the private property of FnF. So a constitutionally compliant interpretation would have made NWS unlawful.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/constitutional_avoidance
Constitutional Avoidance
Constitutional Avoidance is the principal that, if possible, the Supreme Court should avoid ruling on constitutional issues, and resolve the cases before them on other (usually statutory) grounds. In practice, what this often means is that if the Supreme Court is faced with two possible interpretations of a statute, one of which is plainly constitutional, and the other of which is of questionable constitutionality, the court will interpret the statute as having the plainly constitutional meaning, to avoid the hard constitutional questions that would come with the other interpretation.
""***THE FSOC IS SLATED TO DISCUSS PRESSING CHARGES AGAINST THE CORRUPT SUPREME COURT JUSTICES*** They meet on July 16th."
May be it is time that these people be tested for normal health/mental functioning and removed if they fail the tests.
The ruling is so brazen that it beats any common sense.
"The supreme court is a complete disgrace! What's happened with the GSE's is literally no different than a forceful mafia takeover"
The dissenting Justice has said it in so many words that the ruling is a farce to deny the justice to plaintiffs. The case has been sent to lower courts where judges will deny justice in another farce ruling.
"especially when the GOVT Lied in Lamberth Court"
Doesn't appear to be such a bad thing nowadays in the U.S. judicial system."
When politicians and bureaucrats lie to judges, they understand each other. BTW it is mutual and happens every day to punish the helpless common people.
Read the many rulings in FnF cases. Judges have been taking the help of Defendants to write part of the ruling. Introductory narratives have been proven to be lie through discovery process but it does not matter.
In the current judicial system only big organizations, lobbyists, media, political parties, Groups with politically correct ideologies ... have better chance of winning against executive and legislative branches.
"I recall posts indicating that former FHFA Director Calabria would do the same. Matter of fact, he was referred to as the GSE Savior "The Recap & Release Director."
If MC were to release FnF from Conservatorship, his legacy would have been permanently preserved in history for a long time as a honest public servant. Now MC looks more like a hypocrite who was shown the door unceremoniously which he deserved.
"GSE's should be renamed GCC (Government Cash Cows)."
Is HERA, FHFA Conservatorship and NWS lowest point in the financial history of US?
BTW when was the last time court ruling was so controversial and brazen.
Guido2, Thanks for posting.
All Judges should read this opinion by Sr. Judge Loren A. Smith.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E59dYufUUAAGUqC?format=jpg&name=large
"That's under APA. SCOTUS also ruled that Collins can pursue their claim under the constitution. Constitution trumps APA.
Read chessmaster's post stickied by Patswil."
Constitutional Avoidance is the principal that, if possible, the Supreme Court should avoid ruling on constitutional issues, and resolve the cases before them on other (usually statutory) grounds.
Why would SCOTUS rule on constitutional issue, when it could have resolved the issue by correctly interpreting clause ("acting in the interest of agency") or on the basis of APA. It could have easily abolished HERA because HERA is a wrong law created for wrong agency FHFA and wrong companies FnF.
SCOTUS has opened Pandora's box with its ruling on Collin's petition.
"Let's see if the Judge in the 5th Circuit picked up on that, it may give the ruling Judge below a reason for delivering some Justice to the beleaguered shareholders!"
Probably plaintiffs can file revision petition to SCOTUS, pointing out all the errors in the ruling.
"that - dead for 10 years --- and Vader
beneath you"
Donotunderstand, You are responding to wrong post.
Leaving aside the emotional aspect, please let us know is it right to stick job when one can honorably retire and let other competent people do the justice to the job that people of this nation deserve.
"Attorney for plaintiff has just given the textbook definition for ineptitude. This sh*t is over."
If this is a new question about law that SCOTUS has no ruled, then plaintiffs can still pursue to invalidate HERA as it is a law that is wrongly enacted for wrong agency and wrong business. This shows ineptitude or malice of the bureaucrats in drafting the HERA. Probably congress passed this law in a hurry during 2008 crisis just trusting these people.
FDIC/Banks are not comparable to FHFA/FnF in any way. These entities are in totally different businesses and regulatory roles. Still bureaucrats copied the FDIC laws to create HERA.
MC and others who were involved in creating HERA and justifying it, should feel totally embarrassed/guilty about their contributions to the lawless mess and causing irreparable harm to Global economy, FnF and FnF shareholders. BTW imposing conservatorship on FnF transformed the manageable US 2008 financial crisis in to global financial meltdown.
"The justices concluded that NWS decision was based on facts, while the GSEs would turn substantial profitable soon was only speculation. "
HappAlways, Thanks for the post.
It is really confusing. When did SCOTUS start conducting case trial based on facts. SCOTUS is supposed to rule on questions of law raised in the petition. BTW the questions raised in the case are about laws and not about the facts.
So far no court has conducted any actual trial proceedings in FnF cases. SCOTUS has simply copied the self serving spin narratives from defendants' filing without any cross examination or validation.
"And as we found out a short time ago, 5 minutes might be too long for some judges!"
Yes, With Collin's ruling these judges have lost the credibility and trust.
"History and experience show us lifetime is simply too long and too isolated So maybe 15-20 year terms
enough to let them use their brains with freedom (and pension) but not so long as life"
Yes, life tenure is too long. In other countries people are appointed to such positions in their mid fifties or later and they serve maximum of another 5 to 10 year term before they retire.
"Remember, in the late 1700s, male life expectancy was only about 38 years so, in theory, a lifelong appointment didn't last too awfully long. Fast forward to modern times, Ruth Vader Ginsburg had been dead for 10 years when they finally declared her dead. She had a stick up her ass to make her sit upright and Sotomayer was throwing her voice."
Jog49, These are very true Statements.
In those days life term tenure meant, it was normal retirement age or in practice far less for many. Now these people brazenly stick to their jobs even when they are terminally sick. Obviously these people are betraying the trust, honor and respect these positions badly need.
The ruling in Collin's case is too brazen by any standards. They should have questioned the appropriateness of copying FDIC laws (for Banking Business) to create HERA (for FnF - monoline insurance Business). FDIC and FHFA have totally different business functions (Banking vs Monoline Mortgage guaranty/ insurance). It should make any one question the competency of these people when they do not even question the appropriateness of laws and then they rule that FHFA Conservator (private actor) can act its own interest.
When FDIC acts in its own interest, it is acting in its own interest because it is in insurance business. It is natural to expect FDIC to act in its own interest because it insures the bank deposits and it has to minimize the losses. In case of FHFA, it is sucking the resources of conservatees even for its day to day operations and has no money risks with FnF.
Hope attorneys for Plaintiff properly explain how it is wrong for FHFA to act its own interest.