Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Expanding on your 1 or 2 liners from stated conclusion to the reasons that support your conclusion allows the viewer to understand why you support a particular conclusion! Thanks for clarifying the REASONS BEHIND YOUR CONCLUSION:

That is yet to be determined. The case in scotus yesterday was inferred textually according to the applicable statute. Thomas dissent clearly thought otherwise that essentially ultra vires action did apply to that particular law along with years of precedent. That can easily relate to the HERA statute where textually FHFA can do whatever it wants and no court can intervene except only in those in which are specifically authorized in the laws text. Get it?

I disagree with that legal analysis. Why? In Justice Thomas's 10 page dissent he said that "unauthorized access" is clearly defined in the definitions section of the Statute, describing EXACTLY what that means, and the officers conduct was therefore unauthorized access pursuant to the definitions section of the Statute and the historical usage of unauthorized access to property. Here, HERA has no definitions section specifically answering what the FHFA Director can do under the "may be in the best interests of FHFA" SO HOW DOES THAT BODE NOT WELL FOR THE COLLINS PLAINTIFFS?