The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), its director Andrea Gacki, as well as the Department of the Treasury and its secretary, Scott Bessent, do not believe their anti-money laundering rule, which is slated to go into effect on Dec. 1, 2025, will cause Fidelity National Financial (FNF) irreparable harm. The defendants made these claims in a response to FNF’s motion for a preliminary injunction, filed on Wednesday.
FNF filed its lawsuit against FinCEN and the Treasury in May 2025. The suit challenges FinCEN’s anti-money laundering rule, which requires title firms to report specific details on all-cash home purchase transactions. These include the names, addresses, dates of birth, citizenship status and ID numbers of all people involved — including minors — plus payment details and information about trusts and entities that are purchasing the property. The rule was promulgated under the Biden administration and is set to go into effect in December 2025.
According to FinCEN, criminals, corrupt officials and terrorists have used anonymous, cash-based real estate purchases to launder money, prompting it to issue its new policy.
The defendants argue that FNF’s request for an injunction delaying the enforcement of the rule is improper and should be denied. They also argue that an injunction would disrupt FinCEN’s enforcement efforts and national security goals. The defendants also note that FNF has previously complied with FinCEN’s geographic targeting orders without complaint.
In the filing, the defendants argue that FNF’s arguments will not prevail because, as they see it, the rule is valid and called for. According to the defendants, FinCEN was granted the authority to make rules such as this under the Bank Secrecy Act. Additionally, they argue that the rule is not arbitrary or capricious and that it does not violate the First or Fourth Amendments.
The defendants also argue that FNF’s claims of irreparable harm are not valid as the plaintiffs waited 361 days before filing their motion for injunctive relief. In addition, the defendants push back against FNF’s argument that complying with the rule will cost title companies “hundreds of millions” of dollars, stating that FNF gave no specific evidence or calculations of actual costs and that they had previously admitted that compliance costs would not be absorbed by companies but instead passed to consumers via higher fees.
As the rule will only impact roughly 11% of all real estate transactions, according to the defendants, FinCEN and the defendants do not see how the rule could be viewed as so harmful and impactful.
“Because Plaintiffs have neither shown likelihood of success on their claims nor irreparable harm, their motion should be denied,” the filing states.
FNF has also filed a motion for summary judgment, a move the American Land Title Association threw its support behind by filing an amicus curiae brief.
