
The court sprinkled in some legal jargon – apparently, Federal Reserve Banks have a discretionary thumb to say “nope” to applications from institutions that, by some strange coincidence, meet all the eligibility requirements. Judge Ebel’s opinion scoffed at Custodia’s protest that the law says services “shall be available,” because apparently, “shall be available” is just a suggestion, like “please” or “maybe.” Instead, the court threw in the Federal Reserve Act’s clause claiming they “may receive” deposits – which, according to the court, sounds more like a polite invitation than a binding obligation.