Biden ousts housing finance chief after U.S. Supreme Court ruling
		
		 
		Send a link to a friend  
 
		
		
		 [June 24, 2021] 
		By Lawrence Hurley 
		 
		WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Joe Biden 
		on Wednesday fired the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency who 
		had been appointed by his predecessor Donald Trump, acting hours after 
		the U.S. Supreme Court expanded presidential powers to make it easier to 
		oust the agency chief. 
		 
		The court also nixed separate claims brought by shareholders of Fannie 
		Mae and Freddie Mac - both overseen by the FHFA - challenging a 2012 
		agreement between the agency and the Treasury Department arising from 
		the government's rescue of the mortgage finance firms following the 2008 
		financial crisis.  
		 
		The justices, in the 7-2 decision, upheld part of a lower court's ruling 
		that the FHFA's structure was unconstitutional under the separation of 
		powers doctrine that distributes authority among the government's three 
		branches because its lone director was insufficiently accountable to the 
		president.  
		  
		
		  
		
		 
		The justices also voted unanimously to block separate claims brought by 
		the shareholders challenging the 2012 agreement. 
		 
		Biden, a Democrat, quickly removed agency chief Mark Calabria, who had 
		been appointed by the Republican Trump. Calabria was confirmed by the 
		Senate in 2019 to serve a five-year term. 
		 
		Calabria said in a statement he respects the Supreme Court ruling and 
		Biden's authority to remove him. 
		 
		Late on Wednesday, FHFA announced that Biden had appointed Sandra 
		Thompson as the agency's acting director. Thompson has served as the 
		agency's deputy director of the Division of Housing Mission and Goals 
		since 2013, FHFA said.  
		 
		A White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity prior to the 
		Thompson announcement, said Biden would name a replacement "who reflects 
		the administration's values."  
		 
		The ruling was a body blow to the shareholders in their long-running 
		battle contesting the government's total claim on the two companies' 
		profits despite winning on the constitutional issue. It likely also 
		means that Fannie and Freddie will not be leaving their government 
		conservatorship anytime soon. 
		 
		The justices, in a ruling authored by Justice Samuel Alito, sent the 
		case back to lower courts to consider whether the shareholders can 
		obtain compensation based on their constitutional claims. The court 
		noted that the shareholders could not seek to void the 2012 agreement 
		altogether.  
		 
		Alito cast doubt on the notion that any subsequent FHFA decisions 
		implementing the 2012 agreement could be cast aside, saying "there is no 
		reason to regard any of the actions taken by the FHFA ... as void." 
		 
		[to top of second column] 
			 | 
            
             
            
			  
            
			The Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, U.S., June 21, 
			2021. REUTERS/Sarah Silbiger 
            
			
			  
            The U.S. government in 2008 seized Fannie and 
			Freddie, private enterprises established by Congress, at the height 
			of the financial crisis as they teetered on the brink of insolvency. 
			The government took a majority stake in each and they were placed 
			under the supervision of the FHFA, which was created at the same 
			time. 
			 
			Wednesday's ruling triggered the largest sell off in Fannie Mae and 
			Freddie Mac in years, with their common shares each sliding by more 
			than 30%. Their preferred shares, owned largely by hedge funds that 
			had bet that the litigation would go their way and potentially force 
			the government to release the companies from the conservatorship 
			under which they have operated, fell by more than twice that margin.
			 
			 
			Fannie's preferred "S" series and Freddie's preferred "Z" series - 
			among the last private capital raisings by both before their 
			government takeover - both sank more than 60%, their largest one-day 
			losses since the day after they were seized by the government.  
			 
			The FHFA is led by a single director who until Wednesday's ruling 
			could be removed by the president only "for cause."  
			 
			The Supreme Court ruling, in line with a similar 2020 decision 
			concerning the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), gives 
			presidents the authority to remove the agency's chief at any time. 
			The court in the CFPB case ruled that the agency's single-director 
			structure was unconstitutional, deciding that a president should be 
			able to fire its director at any time. 
			 
			The 2012 agreement, sometimes referred to as the "net worth sweep," 
			eliminated dividend payouts to various shareholders and required 
			Fannie and Freddie to pay the U.S. Treasury an amount equal to their 
			quarterly net worth each quarter, which now totals billions of 
			dollars. 
              
             
			 
			Fannie and Freddie shareholders Patrick Collins, Marcus Liotta and 
			William Hitchcock sued the FHFA and the Treasury Department in Texas 
			in 2016 arguing that the agreement exceeded FHFA's authority and 
			should be invalidated. Trump's administration appealed a 2019 ruling 
			by the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 
			 
			(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Pete 
			Schroeder, Dan Burns and Steve Holland; Editing by Will Dunham and 
			Lincoln Feast.) 
			[© 2021 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2021 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.  |