Fannie Mae (FNMA)

[obiterdictum]

Obit:

Thanks for your responses.

You are welcome.


It should be obvious Im not an attorney, and woefully ignorant on the legal system.

You posted:

Monetary restitution is not before SCOTUS. What is before SCOTUS is:

1. Affirmation or Reversal of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling on the merits of Plaintiffs’ constitutional claim.

2. Reversal or Affirmation of the Fifth Circuit’s ruling of denying a meaningful remedy for FHFA’s violation of the separation of powers.

Isnt it true that number 2, above "is all about money"?

No. Number two is about whether a backward-looking remedy is to made available in a presidential removal case. What the backward-looking remedy is or should be is not an issue before SCOTUS.

"If" Scotus decides (favorably for shareholders) that the "meaningful remedy" of FHFA's violation of the seperation of powers is insufficient to compensate shareholders, then there follows "What IS sufficent compensation to shareholders?"

There is no issue of insufficient compensation before SCOTUS. So, no decision regarding insufficient compensation is to be or will be decided.

Thus, this is ultimately a suit where the bottom line is MONEY, and remedy ($$) as Epstein suggested.

No. This case before SCOTUS is about whether a backward-looking remedy is to be made available. The 5th Circuit argued and denied a backward-looking remedy. This is one of two question that is being appealed. What the backward-looking remedy is or should be is not an issue before SCOTUS. Monetary compensation will not be debated. Whether or not a backward-looking remedy is allowed is what will be discussed. What the SCOTUS decision will be will give direction to the lower courts who will follow that direction.

Scotus is not supposed to be about "changing political policy", but rather interpreting the Constitution:

In other words, did an unconstitutional "taking" of private property for public use without just compensation occur?

A violation of the 5th Amendment, a "taking," is not an issue in this case. The issue of a taking is currently being argued in the United States Court of Federal Claims where monetary claims against the U.S. government are adjudicated.