Replies to post #724644 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Mnemonic]

I did hear the judges in Rop. One told plaintiffs that he struggled with the argument that the De Facto Officer Doctrine did not apply.

I think all judges are concerned that a President can appoint acting directors and bypass Senate confirmation entirely. At least one judge seemed to buy the govt argument that this hasn't been historically abused, possibly due to other political pressures that Presidents face

I think it's promising that Obama tried once in 2010--senate rejected--and then waited until 2013 to nominate another Director, who was confirmed. I think that is clear that De Facto cannot trump Appointments Clause or what's the point of confirmations?

Still, the courts have found a way to fuck us repeatedly. I think they'll just add term limits to Acting Directors in HERA, then find some way to allow current director to ratify the 3rd amendment or something equivalent. The truth is that no court wants to rule against the government, much less hands over billions to investors. Imo, they're actually lazy as well, and will do as little to upset the turnip cart as humanly possible because they don't want to expend the mental energy determining appropriate remedy. Kind of like how SCOTUS punted on remedy in Collins by requiring we all consider a but/for world, when the law stated that unlawful agency action shall be set aside.