Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[clarencebeaks21]

This will be remanded.
Defense is arguing best that as a matter of law, even considering the POTUS letter, there is no set of facts pled that can establish the counter-factual in this instance because politics and shifting priority itself is an equal factor in determining causality and thus ‘Harm’ is impossible to adjudicate with any reasonable accuracy. This effectively builds a non-justiciable point into the harm analysis; it’s analogous to why SCOTUS continues to reject any adjudication of gerrymandering on ‘science’.

Yet this point too has some logical merit so I expect Remand, for District Court to try to develop facts further and test its own legal analysis as courts must in such areas—with case by case adjudication.

The other reason Defense argues is POTUS could have directed UST to stop paying the NWS because UST Secretary reports directly at-will to POTUS. There is some merit to this point because- —effectively—POTUS can *anytime* order one at-will federal department or agency Director to reneg or breach an agreement with another agency. In my experience federal agencies can & do sue each other, …more often than you might think…and it is usually motivated by a legitimate policy (political) dispute. Ultimately IMO though
This is an unwinnable circular argument because FHFA was understood by the Admin to be independent under HERA; so to ‘work around’ the will of Congress would have been no different than removing the for-cause FHFA Director. Such act could have been considered itself a violation of separation of powers of the worst kind…an attempt to reduce the Director of the FHFA to an under-Secretary of the UST.