Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

This is a recurring theme that I have seen in several Amici Briefs, one which the USSCT unfortunately ignored in Seila:

"If plaintiffs have no incentive to challenge
unconstitutionally structured agencies in court,
Congress has no incentive to ensure that newly
created agencies are consistent with the
constitutional design. See, e.g., David H. Gans,
Severability as Judicial Lawmaking, 76 Geo. Wash. L.
Rev. 639, 644 (2008). “If courts are willing to save a
statute by severing on the legislature’s say-so, even
when that entails substantial rewriting, the
legislature has much less of a reason or incentive to
respect constitutional norms at the outset.” Id.
In this case, vacating the Net Worth Sweep would
create incentives to respect the constitutional
structure for separation of powers. If courts purport to
remedy injuries in cases involving appointment and
removal by blue-pencilling the statute to make
officials removable at will, but do not order any other
kind of relief for the plaintiffs, future plaintiffs have
significantly diminished incentives to bring such
challenges. Collins, 938 F.3d at 610 (Oldham and Ho,
JJ., concurring and dissenting). In order to properly
exercise the judicial power, vindicate constitutional
separation of powers, and incentivize Congress to act
consistent with the Constitution, this Court should
vacate the Net Worth Sweep."