I've been studying the governments argument that because Edward DeMarco was an acting director and not explicitly protected from at will removal by HERA, the POTUS can remove him at will, but that seems like a red herring because:
(1) The FHFA would toggle back and forth from an Independent Agency to a Dependent Agency
(2) Under HERA the POTUS would have to choose from one of three deputy directors who were selected by the FHFA Director
(3) Here, Obama couldn't remove the acting director because more than 210 days had passed and the Federal Vacancies Reform Act restrictions prohibit it.
(4) Obama said that he didn't have the power to remove the Republican appointed current acting director.
But sure, in some type of remedial dodge the SCOTUS could deny us relief, but they seem to understand the blatant abuse of governmental power going on here and are likely to spank the government for their overreach in this Nationalization of two private corporations.
Even if they rule that the potus can remove an acting director at will, couldn't they provide the Collins Plaintiffs with relief by ruling that under the APA the nws was an ultra vires and unlawful act of a conservator and therefore shall be set aside?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
