Replies to post #562842 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[bcde]

"While the 5th Circuit En Banc panel found "The Shareholders plausibly allege that the Third Amendment exceeded FHFA’s conservator powers...," the court remanded the case back to the original three-judge panel for further consideration. The en banc court did not issue an injunction barring FHFA & treasury from continuing the sweep, they just provided guidance to the three-judge panel on how they should rule. "

This is not what 5th circuit ruled.

5th circuit based on HERA and other laws ruled that FHFA exceeded its authority by imposing NWS on FnF. Shareholders or 5th Circuit never used word "plausibly". 5th circuit allowed district court the option of summary judgment because their ruling was based laws.

Since the 5th circuit ruling is based on laws and not based on business decisions or facts, plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgement in their favor on count 1.

Knowing very well these facts, it is would be wrong on the part of conservator to continue with NWS.

[chessmaster315]

Agreed. Im not a lawyer, but the En Banc decision said shareholders were "injured" by the net worth sweep.
So, it makes sense to prevent FURTHER injury, the injured party should stop injuring shareholders by continuing to robb their company and making it (extra) difficult to recapitalize with continued confiscation of shareholder property by the government agency who was directed to "preserve and conserve" our assets.