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.
FOF & Rob - agreed Rob captured all relevant items. If in Anthrex the PTO director now gets to review the subordinate APJs (PTAB?) decision, who reviews the director’s decisions if he’s insulated from the president?
Rob, nice post. I should’ve said the director gets to review the patent judges decision. The key distinction of Anthrex vs. Collins is Calabria is the director. We’ll see …
FOF - what type of remedy would’ve had an impact from Anthrex? The way I read remedy from Anthrex was Anthrex gets to have the original patent review rejection thrown out and a re-review of the patent challenge with administrative patent judges who are answerable to the commerce secretary or USPTO director (if I remember correctly).
Not sure Anthrex would have much impact on SP.
FOF - Anthrex bodes well for Collins.
Even the insulated administrative patent judges are held unconstitutional. A single, lead director of an agency like FHFA is, of course, unconstitutional. The remedy is to allow Anthrex's patent to be reviewed again. Retrospective remedy ...
Remedy, as we all know, is the big question. Will SCOTUS vacate and remand for damages? Or will SCOTUS go even further? Or will SCOTUS do nothing?
Based off of Anthrex, I think they do something ... And FHFA as a gov agency, regardless of conservator vs regulator is also before SCOTUS.
Soon enough ...
Here's to SCOTUS's infinite wisdom!
Hi FOF - do you know what securities are at issue between GS and Arkansas “fund”?
That case could certainly speak to character of Paulson directly, or to a lesser extent, indirectly.
They could've agreed with the 5th circuit and said FHFA breaks separation of powers and therefore Calabria is fireable at will. They could go onto to say the 5th circuit was correct in only allowing prospective relief, that the NWS has to stop. Period, the end, agree with the 5th circuit ...
As was stated many, many times during orals, this case is about remedy. I expect some form of retrospective relief will be granted, regardless of APA or Constitutional wins. The question is what?
- Vacate and Remand (VR) only - damages TBD in lower courts
- Injunction (PSPA) & VR - monetary damages TBD in lower courts
- Injunction plus 10% overage = 30 billion
- Injunction plus senate confirmed director $s = ~60 billion
- Injunction plus all NWS $s returned = 124 billion
- Injunction plus whole conservatorship = > 124 billion
- Or just agree with the 5th circuit - but why so long then .. who knows?
There are variations in-between each of the above - not meant to be an exhaustive list ...
Soon enough ...
It would've been quite simple to uphold the 5th circuit and be done with it. I suspect something is brewing ... moderate to extreme in my opinion, and both are beneficial to shareholders ...
All she wrote for today.
Opinions are released in order of seniority with newest releasing first.
Neil Gorsuch is 3rd newest.
Goldman is first ... no R
Hopefully she’ll make the grade post Scotus.
Thanks FOF - sounded like they were being pushed before 2008, in 2007,!to take on more alt-a and subprime. It wasn’t clear to me if she was referring to the regulator or company execs making the push when the rest of the market was plateauing. Thoughts?
I’d love to see ur policy coverage for a family of 5 for 500$ a month. Probably better not buying at all …
500 per month for a family of 5? It must be through an employer or it would only cover bandaids.
UHC is no friend of the insured I promise you that … they are floating an idea of getting preapproval for emergency room visits? Corporate greed at it’s best … this is a balance
Hehe - gotta be able to have a brain of your own and not be brainwashed by the media, family, or friends on either side. And then there are the Reds …
Per the official gov inquiry: THE FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY REPORT
This was an independent gov review of FnF’s involvement. I’m assuming this was referenced somewhere in all of the documents before Scotus, either direct via collins or via Amicus.
Regarding FnF’s participation in the 2008 financial crisis. This is echoed by Tim Howard’s amicus.
I agree with the ACA decision. Universal healthcare for struggling rural folks, single moms, folks with preexisting conditions. How is that bad? I have to have insurance for my car, which is hogwash ... I don't want to pay higher healthcare premiums for deadbeats who don't have healthcare ...
I don't want to pay for them ...
The republican counter proposal on universal healthcare was based on Massachusetts - talk about liberal ... The media wants folks to believe there are huge differences between americans, as well as the ruskies, to sell air time and ads ... it's all hogwash and not worth the time ...
There is no direct injury to Texas ... and I agree.
The NWS is direct injury on a derivative basis, night and day compared to Tex v Cal.
It looks like the remaining Justices to pen an opinion for December are Alito, Gorsuch and Breyer. Breyer did get Tex v Cal in November, which was a big one = ACA.
Hoping for Gorsuch or Alito.
Per Orals, Gorsuch seemed very pro-Collins. In fact of all the Justices, he seemed to be one of two of the most supportive of Collins IMO.
So Thomas wrote Nestle. Breyer got ACA. The way Orals went, It felt to me like Gorsuch was lead on Collins. We shall see ...
No, looks like Cal v Tex was November
California v Texas was December, right? And it was penned by Bryer - that is good - that would leave Thomas, Gorsuch and Alito ...
Unitary Executive! I like it!
Per Amicus NEW CIVIL LIBERTIES ALLIANCE
Will SCOTUS use the extreme circumstances of Collins to make a "one off" ruling given the egregious nature of government actors?
Basically put the bar so high the only time Collins could ever be referenced in future cases on constitutional grounds would require such egregious acts similar to the nationalization of private companies.
We wait ...
Rob, I think that is the key, Thompson is attempting to encircle the gov and not allow Scotus to take an escape route to avoid the tough questions.
Humphrey's and Wiener attach the "acting director vs confirmed directory" as well as HERA being written to create FHFA as an independent agency regardless of director status.
Seila and Bowsher speak to remedy.
Per Seila -
As I'm sure others have posted, Collins isn't considered a big deal in many circles.
because 7 ate 9?
that's it - onto Thursday ...
Rob, Alito and the Unitary Executive points in our favor - i think we get something substantial from Alito, Kavanaugh, Barrett , Gorsuch and Thomas. Maybe tomorrow …
It’s been 13 years and the warrants haven’t been executed. News flash, they won’t ever be executed. The whole Mnuchin letter agreement was meant to communicate to Scotus and placate Paulson.
Question: Are warrants part of the PSPA?
Answer: Yes
Court of Federal Claims has already ruled against the warrants via AIG. Sweeney, before she left echoed that prior ruling.
More legal issues awaiting the gov and they know it. SCOTUS will moot it all anyway.
Rob, Pags doesn’t have the cash to bank role a decades long, multi-pronged legal approach. This is exclusively the big boy realm. Pags is boutique …
I suspect, just like the other items in the Mnuchin “Letter Agreement,” the warrant portion was all optics to a) show Scotus how ridiculous a 79.9% equity stake as part of loan terms is as part of the PSPA (also already proven in the CFC) and b) to placate “Paylson” and the pseudo-public outrage narrative, which does not exist.