Replies to post #684365 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

And it would finally provide the political cover of having an elected official eliminate the nws.

[RumplePigSkin]

Man No Name, you're wrong - see last bolded section per Mr. Mooppan.

JUSTICE BARRETT: Well, so who decides when the Third Amendment -- when this arrangement should come to an end, if ever?Because, you know, Treasury viewed it as winding down the GSEs, winding down their assets, although, you know, it's been characterized not as a receivership but as a conservatorship.

Could the confirmed director have said, okay, listen, now this is no longer serving to make the GSEs solvent, and so it's time to shift arrangements? Did the confirmed director have that authority under the Third Amendment?

MR. MOOPPAN: So, yes, just like the Second Amendment and the First Amendment and everything else that the agency does. That's why we think that they're entitled to relief prospectively that the FHFA director should be removable at will. And then, if the FHFA director wants to change any of these agreements AND CAN GET TREASURY TO AGREE, they can.

Even the government acknowledges any ratification will require Treasury to get onboard. It truly does take two to tango. Per ROLG, there are a whole host of issues with the "half-way" ratification approach.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2020/19-422_4gdj.pdf