Replies to post #507329 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[kthomp19]

From the Harvard Law Review article you linked to (on page 4):

the court lamented that “case law construing ‘just compensation’ under the Fifth Amendment” required the court to “look to the property owner’s loss, not to the Government’s gain.”

That conflicts with your statement of:

whatever the GOV derived from the transaction would absolutely confirm the fair market value of the illegal exaction.

I can see an award of whatever commons trade for at the time of warrant exercise (because that's the maximum possible loss from that point), and maybe I could see an award of around $7 (which is what FNMA traded at the day before conservatorship). But the risk of the courts finding a way back to zero damages anyway outweighs those potential rewards, in my opinion. At best this court award is an in-the-money put option.

Edit: a bit more reinforcement is found in this synopsis of the Brown vs Legal Foundation of Washington case (cited in that Harvard Law Review passage I quoted above):

Compensation under the Takings Clause is determined by the loss of the private citizen rather than the gain of the government.