Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[FFFacts]

How exactly does a court rule that a nationalization has taken place? Which case(s) are you referring to when you say that?

When the appeals court issues its ruling they can concur that a nationalization occurred and there was no foreseeable economic value due to the taking that occurred either in 2008 or 2012 with the NWS. Numerous other publications and even hank paulson stated himself that this was a nationalization. Cases are the ones filed in COFC and those that have direct claims post nationalization.

Actual nationalization has not happened. The shares still trade among private investors in a public market.

It doesn't matter if worthless shares trade after a nationalization. The prices are dictated by the market not of any actual company value. Do the shares need to be halted for a nationalization to occur?

I don't believe extinguishing the shares is of any benefit to the government; why would they bother with that?

It's not up to the government it's just a matter of law and the terms of the agreements where Treasury owns 100% of the liquidation preference. Those shares cannot be sold to private parties.

FnF's charters (see Section 303 on page 11) also mandate that they are shareholder-owned companies, so actual nationalization would require a change to the charter, which in turn would require action by Congress.

The charters are meaningless if a full blown nationalization occurred. Order or priory is constitutional claims > lesser laws rules and regulations.