Fannie Mae (FNMA)

[ano]

It is not only “for cause” that is questioned, plaintiffs have established following to be outside the separation of powers:

5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(C) Scope of review (the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law)
12 U.S.C. § 4511(a) Establishment (independent)
12 U.S.C. § 4512(b)(2)TERM (for cause)
12 U.S.C. § 4516(f)(2) NOT GOVERNMENT FUNDS (outside appropriations act)
12 U.S.C. § 4617(f) Limitation on court action
12 U.S.C. §4617(b)(2)(A) (i) succeed to all rights, titles, powers, and privileges

So if SCOTUS decides only “for cause” the others BECOME automatically
void ab initio, (it doesn’t matter if only “for cause” or all of them are illegal "for cause" is enough)

if one small part is missing in the engine the motor doesn’t work anymore that is the case here, HERA was written that way.

why is it positive - today - for the court to say the cause needs to be changed to no cause

will that alone do anything good or bad ?