🚨🏛️ Big Legal Energy Alert: Fidelity Drags FinCEN to Court Over “Overkill” AML Rule — Asks Judge to Slam the Brakes 🚨
Hey fam 👀 Buckle up: we’re talking blockchain-adjacent drama, regulatory throwdowns, and one of the largest title insurance players in the U.S. firing legal shots 📜💥 at the federal finance cops. You guessed it — Fidelity National Financial (FNF) is going full “This is fine 🐶🔥” meme over a new rule from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and they just pulled the pin by filing for summary judgment. Yeah. It’s getting spicy. 🌶️
So, here’s the tea 🫖: The Biden-backed anti-money laundering (AML) rule is set to hit in December 2025. It forces title companies—like FNF and its squad of subsidiaries—to gather and report deep personal data on anyone involved in an all-cash real estate deal. We’re talking names, birth dates, citizenship status, ID numbers—even kids’ info. The feds want to know who’s buying that $5M Miami mansion without a mortgage. Shades of 🤖 meets 🕵️.
FNF? They’re not having it.
In a scorching Monday filing, they told the court this rule isn’t just annoying—it’s straight-up unconstitutional. They’re calling it “a stark example of regulatory overreach” and say it turns FinCEN into the Big Brother of Real Estate, without anything close to congressional permission. 🔍🏘️
Let’s break it down 💡
According to FNF, Congress only let FinCEN go after “suspicious” activity linked to potential legal violations. Instead, the rule mandates that title companies tattle on *every* non-mortgaged, entity-owned real estate deal. We’re talking upwards of 800,000 annual transactions across the U.S.—blanket surveillance vibes. 🧢⛔
And they didn’t stop there:
📊 FNF says FinCEN skipped the mandatory cost-benefit analysis, projecting compliance could cost over $500 MILLION a year (yep, with an “M” 💸).
🗣️ They shredded FinCEN for “compelling speech” — forcing businesses to share data on people without suspicion of wrongdoing, which FNF claims violates both the First and Fourth Amendments. Talk about crossing wires with the Constitution ⚖️.
📩 They say crucial voices (including those calling for a dollar threshold and clarification on trusts 👀) were totally ghosted during the public comment phase.
Basically? FNF says the process was 💩, the logic was Paper Thin™, and the price tag? Absolutely bananas 🍌🔥.
But wait—there’s more…
They’re not just asking the court to side with them. They’re asking for an emergency stay or a preliminary injunction to *pause the rule entirely* until this whole court battle is figured out. Why? Because FNF claims they’ve already been pouring $$ into system upgrades to comply with the rule—and if it rolls out, the costs will “mushroom” into nine-figure territory. Ouch 🧨💸.
And here’s the kicker 🔥
FNF’s legal eagles say this rule nukes the long-standing status quo, punishes legit buyers with heavy data demands, and doesn’t give FinCEN even a sliver of public benefit worthy of the overreach. In their words: “Protecting Fidelity and the public from irreparable injury > enforcing a rule no one asked for.”
So, what’s next, Anita style? 🚀
👩⚖️ Court Hearing: Friday morning. All eyes on whether the judge puts FinCEN’s rule on ice 🧊.
🧠 Implications: If FNF wins, we might be witnessing the beginning of a regulatory rollback, not just for real estate—but for real-world asset tracking and AML enforcement across multiple sectors.
🎯 And for my crypto/AI crew: This case is a *massive* litmus test for how agencies try to peek behind the transactional curtain—even outside blockchain. KYC and privacy debates? Bet they’re headed straight for Main Street.
Buckle up 💼💰 — the intersection of property, privacy, and policy is where the next innovation fights are going down.
As always… Stay sharp, stay decentralized 🧠✨
With real world insight & digital sass,
– Anita 💾
