Fannie Mae (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

The nws, was agreed upon by the Acting Director, Edward DeMarco (what a clueless fhfa director that was) with subsequent unconstitutionally insulated directors approving each and every quarterly sweep, so the Plaintiffs are arguing that the nws should be invalidated because the actions of the nws were taken by an unconstitutionally insulated Acting and Senate confirmed director.

As far as Hashim's, "negotiating a fixed dividend payment to a variable one", nor the "may" versus "shall" duty to conserve and preserve arguments, the Justices didn't seem to be buying it (nor dI'd the 5th Circuit Enbanc court). In retrospect and through documents obtained via discovery, it seems crystal clear WHY the OBummer administration did what it did.

But you ARE right in the fact that if the SCOTUS WANTS to deny the Plaintiffs Collins, et. al., relief they could easily do so, but after listening to oral arguments, given Seila Laws retrospective relief remedy, and just that it would be horrific to all Americans if the SCOTUS rubber stamps Nationalization as a legal and legitimate use of Federal government power, I am more optimistic than pessimistic! But I have been wrong before and I don't think anyone knows for sure, but I like our prospects!