Replies to post #740076 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

I believe that you may be missing the boat here, simply because the Question Presented in Collins dealt with a Separation of Powers issue and not a Constitutional Issue involving the 5th Amendment Takings Clause.

HERA, according to the Collins decision, was a statute that gave the FHFA broad sweeping powers to implement the NWS and Nationalize the GSES. But can HERA (or ANY STATUTE!) empower the federal government to take the personal property of Americans?

In Collins the Supremes could have put an end to the NWS, but chose instead to use a strict literal interpretation of HERA that was contra to the lower courts interpretation of HERA's predecessor from the S&L Crisis of the 1980's.

We will find out in the end whether or not Skepi gets to spike the football in the end zone YET AGAIN!

[Achilles deFlandres]

for the Hume Writ "how is this not a taking" I agree with #2 where they will cement. In a way what seemed like a little encouragement in the Collins opinion "the shareholders have certain Constitutional rights" had nothing to do with guess which right will provide shareholder relief. It simply explained the shareholder rights, of which the 5th amendment taking did not apply in this case.

As Far as Collins Separation of Powers, I think they already did what they were going to do here which was sever removability from the rest of the statute sans vacatur.