Thursday, June 03, 2021 9:36:27 AM
“next step toward responsibly winding down” so the first step was also wind-down
The 3rd was implemented because of the downward spiral, so claims the government, but “now we know” the companies are profitable effective 2012 onwards, with this theory (the reality) the FHFA-C should have acted and should have re-negotiated the deal as it cannot continue forever (“put in sound and solvent condition), this is an inaction of FHFA-C it should have done something about it but it didn’t
Then we have 4617(f) itself this claims no courts can take action, the court says it can take action if ultra vires, but the real action of FHFA-C is “do nothing” as it is allowed per 4617(f), so the courts can always take action if ultra vires, but in this case, it was inaction that caused the injury, so 4617(f) will have to go as the courts will void the action/inaction taken, and not because it is ultra vires(it also is by the way), with this it takes an action that is prohibited by 4617(f) so because the court takes action on the inaction of FHFA-C therefore 4617(f) will have to go as “now we know” the companies are profitable
We differ in opinion, prospective relief (2012-up) will need to be reversed when the un-redacted documents contain an illegal fact(RFP 1-30), therefore it would be wise just to void the entire PSPA per SCOTUS as it is an easy way out for the government and permanent damage to the government can be prevented, and the documents can remain in sealed condition as the SCOTUS decided it was illegal anyway, on the other hand the FHFA is independent, HERA is independent, if the FHFA “for cause” is replaced with “at-will” it becomes executive, so HERA will need to become executive too, if it changes HERA to executive, the powers for a director to determine by himself in his sole discretion to put the companies into conservatorship will be taken away as it otherwise would violate the separation of powers, as the director only can act on regulation in place, we know that did not happen so it will void the PSPA
It is the Fiduciary duty that FHFA has to put the companies in sound and solvent condition, so it needs to take action the courts soon will force upon FHFA, “do nothing” is also illegal according to their statute, the miserable 5% backstop ($200B-$3,7T) from the government can be stricken instantly, it has no use whatsoever
This is incorrect, if it is determined the FHFA-C! (not FHFA) had the power to implement a wind-down contract per conservator statute(4513 absent 4512”for cause”), and the BOD/FHFA meeting documents are unsealed, the contract is legal, upto now the warrant cannot be executed as it is part of the PSPA and the 3rd amendment lawsuits
SCOTUS will probably let us know how/what exactly legal means, or if legal really means illegal, a dissent will be closely watched as it will tell upfront how far the judge is willing to depart from the constitution, my guess is “if” there is a dissent it will be on the surroundings and not on the questions asked itself, on the questions itself I expect a 9-0
Green Leaf Innovations, Inc. Expands International Presence with New Partnership in Dubai • GRLF • Jun 24, 2024 8:30 AM
Bemax Inc. Positions to Capitalize on Industry Growth with New Improved Quality of Mother's Touch® Disposable Diapers • BMXC • Jun 24, 2024 8:00 AM
Last Shot Hydration Drink Announced as Official Sponsor of Red River Athletic Conference • EQLB • Jun 20, 2024 2:38 PM
ATWEC Announces Major Acquisition and Lays Out Strategic Growth Plans • ATWT • Jun 20, 2024 7:09 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Composite Assays of 0.53 and 0.44 Troy Ounces per Ton Gold in Trenches B + C at Fran Gold, British Columbia • NBRI • Jun 18, 2024 9:18 AM
VAYK Assembling New Management Team for $64 Billion Domestic Market • VAYK • Jun 18, 2024 9:00 AM