Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

https://eyeonhousing.org/2021/06/the-aging-housing-stock-4/

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/06/03/politics/supreme-court-realtors-eviction-moratorium/index.html

Then why did lamberth rule the way he did if

On 02-21-17, the USCT of Appeals said: "We hold that the stockholders’ statutory claims are barred
by the Recovery Act’s strict limitation on judicial review. See
12 U.S.C. § 4617(f). We also reject most of the stockholders’
common-law claims. Insofar as we have subject matter
jurisdiction over the stockholders’ common-law claims against
Treasury, and Congress has waived the agency’s immunity
from suit, those claims, too, are barred by the Recovery Act’s
limitation on judicial review. Id. As for the claims against
FHFA and the Companies, some are barred because FHFA
succeeded to all rights, powers, and privileges of the
stockholders under the Recovery Act, id. § 4617(b)(2)(A);
others fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
The remaining claims, which are contract-based claims
regarding liquidation preferences and dividend rights, are
remanded to the district court for further proceedings."

Over 2.5 years later the 16 judge majority opinion in the 5th Circuit EnBanc Ruling ruled differently.

WHAT SPECIFICALLY DID YOU FIND MORE CONVINCING IN LAMBERTH'S COURT THAN THE 5TH CIRCUIT AND WHY? I'M LOOKING FOR SOME SUBSTANCE IN YOUR LEGAL ANALYSIS, SPARE ME THE ONE OR TWO LINERS! For instance, you could reply, I found the legal reasoning in the US Court of Appeals more convincing than the 5ths because 1, 2, 3...