Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[FFFacts]

Judge Thomas in his dissent yesterday, said that the definitions section of the statute describes EXACTLY what "unauthorized access" means.

.

I searched the entire text of the opinion and could not find where Thomas

describes EXACTLY what "unauthorized access" means.

SO PROVE ME WRONG AND SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE HE SAID "UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS" Supra at 11-12 footnote 9 is not his opinion.

So, where in the definitions section of HERA does it list EXACTLY WHAT THE INCIDENTAL POWERS OF A CONSERVATOR ARE?

There is no definition for incidental powers. The powers are outlined below.
‘(J) I
NCIDENTAL POWERS
.—The Agency may, as conser-
vator or receiver—
‘‘(i) exercise all powers and authorities specifically
granted to conservators or receivers, respectively,
under this section, and such incidental powers as shall
be necessary to carry out such powers; and
‘‘(ii) take any action authorized by this section,
which the Agency determines is in the best interests
of the regulated entity or the Agency.

How specifically does the 1st couple of paragraphs from yesterdays Thomas dissent not bode well for the Collins Plaintiffs?

It does bode well for plaintiffs the problem is that he was a dissenter. The textualists viewed it differently based on the text of the law. That is my point. Did you really not understand what I have been clearly saying?

And because the incidental powers in HERA (that are NOT defined in the definitions section of HERA) says "may do what is in the best interests of the FHFA" that the nws is valid and therefore that does not bode well for the Collins Plaintiffs?

From a textualists perspective, maybe.