October Term 2020 · Docket 19-422

Does the Net Worth Sweep violate shareholder rights?

Shareholders claim the government's capital sweep unfairly targets them. The government argues the move protects the housing finance system.

Official caption
Collins v. Mnuchin
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Thompson argued the sweep leaves Fannie and Freddie with no reasonable prospect of adequate capital.

    Mr. Mooppan stated FHFA replaced multibillion-dollar dividend obligations with a variable dividend tied to net worth.

    Mr. Nielson argued an acting director lacks tenure unless Congress explicitly grants it in a statute.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae shareholders sue the government. They claim the Net Worth Sweep violates their rights. The government defends the action as necessary for stability.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 9, 2020.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Shareholders want the court to strike down the Net Worth Sweep.

The government wants the court to uphold the Net Worth Sweep.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Shareholders argue the sweep leaves the companies with no reasonable prospect of adequate capital.

The government argues the sweep protects the housing finance system from collapse.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Breyer asked why the shareholders' claim is distinct from the corporation's claim.

Chief Justice Roberts asked if the targeted class has a unique claim separate from the corporation.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case determines whether the government can restructure financial obligations of conservatorship entities. It defines the limits of shareholder rights during federal conservatorship. It impacts the stability of the housing finance system.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON