Reading this through I think the worst that happens for plaintiffs is the case is sent back to Lamberth with directions that a full administrative record must be supplied…..
Plaintiff lawyers got very little pushback on that when they listed that as one of the remedies they were looking for.
I think it’s doubtful they toss the 3rd amendment. Remember, Judges tend to look for the easy way out and simply sending it back, based on information uncovered between now and Lamberth’s original decision is in no way a repudiation of what Lamberth decided. If one is looking for the 3rd amendment to be declared illegal, I think the Steele case in Delaware/Virginia is the best bet for that.
What can past market crashes teach us about the current one?
What matters then is the instructions and guidance they give. Do they rule that the record is necessary because if it show FHFA was acting at the direction of the Treasury they violated HERA and then judicial review of their actions is warranted? If so, it strikes down defendants main argument.